Given an LDAP tree (AD in my case), is there a way of searching with a wildcard at a specific level in the tree?
i.e. I'm wondering if there's an equivalent way of searching LDAP in the same way that you might do an ls /opt/*/lib in linux.
We're using an F5 for load balancing and SSL proxying. Behind it we're serving up java applications with Tomcat instances. These are fairly small applications - hundreds of concurrent users.
I'd like to compress some of the content, and I'm looking for advice on choosing to configure compression on the F5, or on the tomcat instances. Any big factors in the decision, or is it 6-of-one half-dozen of the other?
I'm trying to do some cleanup similar to this question. In a UNIX OS, I want to delete the directories that aren't being symbolic linked to in a given directory.
e.g. I have a deployment script that creates a directory structure for an app like this:
1.0-201103071711/
1.0-201103071718/
1.0-201103071729/
current -> /opt/myapps/fooapp/1.0-201103071729/
I want to create a script that will remove the directories in that directory that aren't the "current" directory. Thanks!
I've read that securing services with client certificates is more secure than using the combination of TLS with basic authentication.
Client certificates have substantial drawbacks in terms of setup complexity and performance, so I'm looking for more specific reasons on how client certificates are more secure, and some examples of situations where they're justified. Thanks!
I'm trying to introduce a variable and add it to the global path in ubuntu 10.04. According to the official docs, /etc/environment is the right place. Here's what my example looks like:
GRADLE_HOME=/etc/gradle-0.9-preview-3
PATH="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:$GRADLE_HOME/bin"
The GRADLE_HOME variable is added to the environment, but it's not interpreting the $GRADLE_HOME variable during the PATH assignment. Hard-coding it works fine. Not a big deal, but I'd like to know if variable substitution is supported, or if there's a better way to do this? Thanks!
I'm doing some benchmarking with IOMeter, and I'm seeing a consistent and susbtantial drop-off in performance after running the first test in my VMWare environments. These drop-offs are about the same on the three VMs I've tested on, which makes me think it's a configuration setting, or something about my VMs.
For example, one system (local RAID 10) went from 388 I/Os per second the first run, to about 211 I/Os per second on every run after that. Everything else about the test was identical, and I also bounced the machine in between runs. Testing on my local machine in a non-virtualized environment is consistent, whereas if I test it with a local VM, I also get a performance drop-off after the first run.
Any explanations or suggestions to explore?
I'm putting servers on a rack for the first time, and am thinking a 4-post open frame rack is adequate for my needs. I'm putting in a few HP DL 385's and a few other things. What I'm wondering is if there's reason to be picky about the rack selection. I'm not concerned about heat or size - just installation and fit. Any recommendations or considerations?
I'm setting up the server environment for a new software development group, which will include 4 test environments.
These are web applications, so each environment will have an application server and a database server.
I'm planning on buying two physical servers (e.g. 6-core CPU each with 12GB or so of RAM), and I'm thinking virtualization is appropriate here. With that in mind, I've thought of a couple ways that I could organize the virtualization strategy:
- Separated by server role: Server 1 has all the application servers, each in their own guest VM. Server 2 has all the databases.
OR
- Separated by environment: Server 1 has a VM for two of the environments, with the VM containing both the app server and the database server. Server 2 would also contain two test environments, with the same style (app server and database in same VM).
The advantages I see with all the app servers on one server and all the databases on another server is that I could probably be more efficient with the database server (one instance running multiple databases). But the other option seems easier to manage (archives/restorations would be contained in a single VM).
Any recommendations? TIA.
I have an existing Windows DB2 database that I'd like to move onto PostgreSQL. The users for the application can live with a weekend's worth of downtime. What's the best way to do that?