Category Archives: Debian

Voice Keying with bash, sox, and aplay

There are plenty of times where it is nice to have Linux transmit things out a radio. One obvious example is the digital communication modes, where software acts as a sort of modem. A prominent example of this in Debian is fldigi.

Sometimes, it is nice to transmit voice instead of a digital signal. This is called voice keying. When operating a contest, for instance, a person might call CQ over and over, with just some brief gaps.

Most people that interface a radio with a computer use a sound card interface of some sort. The more modern of these have a simple USB cable that connects to the computer and acts as a USB sound card. So, at a certain level, all that you have to do is play sound out a specific device.

But it’s not quite so easy, because there is one other wrinkle: you have to engage the radio’s transmitter. This is obviously not something that is part of typical sound card APIs. There are all sorts of ways to do it, ranging from dedicated serial or parallel port circuits involving asserting voltage on certain pins, to voice-activated (VOX) circuits.

I have used two of these interfaces: the basic Signalink USB and the more powerful RigExpert TI-5. The Signalink USB integrates a VOX circuit and provides cabling to engage the transmitter when VOX is tripped. The TI-5, on the other hand, emulates three USB serial ports, and if you raise RTS on one of them, it will keep the transmitter engaged as long as RTS is high. This is a more accurate and precise approach.

VOX-based voice keying with the Signalink USB

But let’s first look at the Signalink USB case. The problem here is that its VOX circuit is really tuned for digital transmissions, which tend to be either really loud or completely silent. Human speech rises and falls in volume, and it tends to rapidly assert and drop PTT (Push-To-Talk, the name for the control that engages the radio’s transmitter) when used with VOX.

The solution I hit on was to add a constant, loud tone to the transmitted audio, but one which is outside the range of frequencies that the radio will transmit (which is usually no higher than 3kHz). This can be done using sox and aplay, the ALSA player. Here’s my script to call cq with Signalink USB:

#!/bin/bash
# NOTE: use alsamixer and set playback gain to 99
set -e

playcmd () {
        sox -V0 -m "$1" \
           "| sox -V0 -r 44100 $1 -t wav -c 1 -   synth sine 20000 gain -1" \
            -t wav - | \
           aplay -q  -D default:CARD=CODEC
}

DELAY=${1:-1.5}

echo -n "Started at: "
date

STARTTIME=`date +%s`
while true; do
        printf "\r"
        echo -n $(( (`date +%s`-$STARTTIME) / 60))
        printf "m/${DELAY}s: TRANSMIT"
        playcmd ~/audio/cq/cq.wav
        printf "\r"
        echo -n $(( (`date +%s`-$STARTTIME) / 60))
        printf "m/${DELAY}s: off         "
        sleep $DELAY
done

Run this, and it will continuously play your message, with a 1.5s gap in between during which the transmitter is not keyed.

The screen will look like this:

Started at: Fri Aug 24 21:17:47 CDT 2012
2m/1.5s: off

The 2m is how long it’s been going this time, and the 1.5s shows the configured gap.

The sox commands are really two nested ones. The -m causes sox to merge the .wav file in $1 with the 20kHz sine wave being generated, and the entire thing is piped to the ALSA player.

Tweaks for RigExpert TI-5

This is actually a much simpler case. We just replace playcmd as follows:

playcmd () {
        ~/bin/raiserts /dev/ttyUSB1 'aplay -q -D default:CARD=CODEC' < "$1"
}

Where raiserts is a program that simply keeps RTS asserted on the serial port while the given command executes. Here's its source, which I modified a bit from a program I found online:

/* modified from
 * https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/programming-9/manually-controlling-rts-cts-326590/
 * */
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 


static struct termios oldterminfo;


void closeserial(int fd)
{
    tcsetattr(fd, TCSANOW, &oldterminfo);
    if (close(fd) < 0)
        perror("closeserial()");
}


int openserial(char *devicename)
{
    int fd;
    struct termios attr;

    if ((fd = open(devicename, O_RDWR)) == -1) {
        perror("openserial(): open()");
        return 0;
    }
    if (tcgetattr(fd, &oldterminfo) == -1) {
        perror("openserial(): tcgetattr()");
        return 0;
    }
    attr = oldterminfo;
    attr.c_cflag |= CRTSCTS | CLOCAL;
    attr.c_oflag = 0;
    if (tcflush(fd, TCIOFLUSH) == -1) {
        perror("openserial(): tcflush()");
        return 0;
    }
    if (tcsetattr(fd, TCSANOW, &attr) == -1) {
        perror("initserial(): tcsetattr()");
        return 0;
    }
    return fd;
}


int setRTS(int fd, int level)
{
    int status;

    if (ioctl(fd, TIOCMGET, &status) == -1) {
        perror("setRTS(): TIOCMGET");
        return 0;
    }
    status &= ~TIOCM_DTR;   /* ALWAYS clear DTR */
    if (level)
        status |= TIOCM_RTS;
    else
        status &= ~TIOCM_RTS;
    if (ioctl(fd, TIOCMSET, &status) == -1) {
        perror("setRTS(): TIOCMSET");
        return 0;
    }
    return 1;
}


int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    int fd, retval;
    char *serialdev;

    if (argc < 3) {
        printf("Syntax: raiserts /dev/ttyname 'command to run while RTS held'\n");
        return 5;
    }
    serialdev = argv[1];
    fd = openserial(serialdev);
    if (!fd) {
        fprintf(stderr, "Error while initializing %s.\n", serialdev);
        return 1;
    }

    setRTS(fd, 1);
    retval = system(argv[2]);
    setRTS(fd, 0);

    closeserial(fd);
    return retval;
}

This compiles to an executable less than 10K in size. I love it when that happens.

So these examples support voice keying both with VOX circuits and with serial-controlled PTT. raiserts.c could be trivially modified to control other serial pins as well, should you have an interface which uses different ones.

Windows & a dying hard disk: Solving with Linux

Today, my workstation sent me this email:

The following warning/error was logged by the smartd daemon:

Device: /dev/sda [SAT], 1 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors

and then a little later, this one:

The following warning/error was logged by the smartd daemon:

Device: /dev/sda [SAT], 1 Offline uncorrectable sectors

From the hard disk’s SMART data, this is a clue that the drive is failing or will soon. Sigh. Incidentally, if smartmontools isn’t installed on your machine, whether it’s a laptop, desktop, or server, it should be.

Although most of you know I run Linux on the metal on my machines almost exclusively, I do maintain a small drive with a Windows installation that I boot into every few months for various reasons. This is that drive.

The drive is non-redundant (no RAID), and although it is backed up, the backup is made via backuppc from the NTFS filesystem mounted on Linux, and is a partial backup – backing up certain data, not the OS. There are, of course, bare metal Windows backup solutions, but I generally don’t want to back up Windows from within Windows on this machine. Restoring Windows isn’t quite as simple as an mkfs, an untar, and a grub-install, either.

So my first thought is: immediately save whatever of the drive I can. So I ran apt-get install gddrescue to install the GNU ddrescue tool. ddrescue is somewhat similar to dd, but deals much more intelligently with bad blocks on the drive. It will try to read them repeatedly, with decreasing block sizes, in an effort to get every last good byte off the disk that it can. If it ultimately fails to get certain bytes read, it will write placeholder data to the output file in place of the missing data, so that the output file maintains proper size and alignment. It also saves a log file that notes what it found (see info ddrescue for more on that.)

So I created an LVM volume for the purpose (not enough free space on /home, and didn’t want to have to shrink it somehow later), and ran:

ddrescue /dev/sda /mnt/sdasave.ddrescue /mnt/sdasave.logfile

Then I went to dinner.

When I got back, I discovered there were 1 or 2 bad sectors, about halfway through the disk, but everything else was fine. So now, the question became: did I lose any data? If so, what? I needed to know if I had to revert to a backup for anything or not.

To answer THAT question, first I had to figure out the offset of the bad spots on the disk. That’s not too hard; the logfile gives it to me:

# Rescue Logfile. Created by GNU ddrescue version 1.15
# Command line: ddrescue /dev/sda /mnt/sdasave.ddrescue sdasave.logfile
# current_pos  current_status
0x3BBB8BFC00     +
#      pos        size  status
0x00000000  0x3BBB8BF000  +
0x3BBB8BF000  0x00001000  -
0x3BBB8C0000  0x38B5346000  +

what we see is that the bad sector starts at byte 0x3BBB8BF000 (256549580800 decimal) and extends for 0x1000 bytes (4096 decimal). Both the drive and NTFS use 512-byte sectors. So dividing by 512, we get sector 501073400 – 501073407 (4096 bytes is 8 sectors).

As a check, I ran grep sector /var/log/kern.log and turned up a bunch of lines like this:

Jun 14 21:39:11 hephaestus kernel: [35346.929957] end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector 501073404

Which is within my calculated range.

But this is an absolute sector on the disk. We need the sector within the partition, so for that, we have to enlist fdisk to make that calculation.

fdisk shows, among other things:

Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sda1   *        2048   976771071   488384512    7  HPFS/NTFS/exFAT

So the Windows partition starts at disk sector 2048.

Let’s just confirm that. If I use dd if=/dev/sda1 bs=512 count=1 | hd | head, I see a line beginning with “.R.NTFS”. Exactly the same as with dd if=/dev/sda bs=512 count=1 skip=2048 | hd | head, so I read the partition table information correctly.

Subtract offset of 2048 from the earlier values, and I get relative sectors 501071352-501071359.

That’s enough to get some solid info from the filesystem via ntfscluster, part of Debian’s ntfs-3g package. I pass -s to it, and ignoring some irrelevant stuff, get my answer:

ntfscluster -s 501071352-501071359 /dev/sda1
Inode 190604 /System Volume Information/{b4816feb-b609-11e1-a908-50e549b934f7}{3808876b-c176-4e48-b7ae-04046e6cc752}/$DATA

I even reran it with a much larger sector range, just to be absolutely sure I had wiggle room in case calculations had an off-by-one error or something somewhere.

This is really great news, because the file in question is pretty much useless – I believe it’s a system restore point, which I won’t be needing anyhow.

So at this point, all that remains is to reinstall this on a different drive. For that, I could just use my ddrescue image. I thought I would take a second image, just to be very extra careful, and use that; I used:

partclone.ntfs --rescue -c -s /dev/sda1 -o sda1.partclone

although ntfsclone would work just as well. This captures only the partition; I’ll need the partition table as well, and perhaps also the space between the partition table and the first partition. I could capture it separately with dd, but it’s already in the ddrescue image, so there’s no need. (GRUB is installed on this drive, but there is no Linux filesystem on it, so it may well exceed the size of the MBR).

Note that for Linux ext[234] filesystems, debugfs can provide the same (and more) info as I got from ntfscluster.

I happen to have a drive of the right size sitting here, which I was about to install in a different machine. So a wipe and a swap and a restore later, and I should be good to go.

This scenario is commonplace enough that I thought I’d post how I dealt with it, in case anyone else ever has hard drive issues.

How to debugging Linux failure to resume from suspend?

I’m running a computer with a Gigabyte Z68A-D3H-B3 motherboard, and have never been able to get it to properly resume from suspend to RAM in Linux. It has worked fine on the rare occasion I’ve tried it in Windows 7.

My somewhat limited usual for debugging aren’t particularly helpful. The system appears to suspend perfectly fine. It just doesn’t resume. To be more precise, when I push the button to resume, the power comes up (fans whir, HDD spins up, etc.) but nothing happens. The USB keyboard and mouse don’t respond, Caps Lock doesn’t toggle any LEDs, it doesn’t respond on the wired LAN, and the display stays off.

Although it’s a desktop, I’d really like to save power on this thing by suspending it when it’s not in use. There’s no sense in wasting power I don’t need to be consuming.

I’ve tried what I used to try on laptops. I tried running in single-user mode, without X, or even the kernel modules for video acceleration loaded. I tried unloading whatever hardware modules I thought I could without completely destabilizing the system. I updated the BIOS to the latest release. I tried various combinations of video tweaks. I tried using s2ram from uswsusp instead of pm-suspend. Nothing made any difference. They all behaved exactly the same.

Googling showed a lot of resources for people that had trouble getting their machines to go to sleep. And also for people whose machines would wake up but just wouldn’t re-activate the display. But precious little for people with my particular symptoms.

What’s a good place to start looking to fix something like this?

Some details…

CPU is Core i5-2400. Kernel is wheezy’s 3.2.0-2-amd64, though this problem has persisted as long as I’ve had this machine, which was running squeeze at install time. Video is NVidia GeForce GTX 560 (GF114). Hard drives are SATA, Ethernet is integrated RTL8111/8168B. Userland is up-to-date amd64 wheezy.

Shell Scripts For Preschoolers

It probably comes as no surprise to anybody that Jacob has had a computer since he was 3. Jacob and I built it from spare parts, together.

It may come as something of a surprise that it has no graphical interface, and Jacob uses the command line and loves it — and did even before he could really read.

A few months ago, I wrote about the fun Jacob had with speakers and a microphone, and posted a copy of the cheat sheet he has with his computer. Lately, Jacob has really enjoyed playing with the speech synthesizer — both trying to make it say real words and nonsense words. Sometimes he does that for an hour.

I was asked for a copy of the scripts I wrote. They are really simple. I gave them names that would be easy for a preschooler to remember and spell, even if they conflicted with existing Unix/Linux commands. I put them in /usr/local/bin, which occurs first on the PATH, so it doesn’t matter if they conflict.

First, for speech systhesis, /usr/local/bin/talk:


#!/bin/bash
echo "Press Ctrl-C to stop."
espeak -v en-us -s 150

espeak comes from the espeak package. It seemed to give the most consistenly useful response.

Now, on to the sound-related programs. Here’s /usr/local/bin/ssl, the “sound steam locomotive”. It starts playing a train sound if one isn’t already playing:


#!/bin/bash
pgrep mpg321 > /dev/null || mpg321 -q /usr/local/trainsounds/main.mp3 &
sl "$@"

And then there’s /usr/local/bin/record:


#!/bin/bash
cd $HOME/recordings
echo "Now recording. Press Ctrl-C to stop."
DATE=`date +%Y-%m-%dT%H-%M-%S`
FILENAME="$DATE-$$.wav"
chmod a-w *.wav
exec arecord -c 1 -f S16_LE -c 1 -r 44100 "$FILENAME"

This simply records in a timestamped file. Then, its companion, /usr/local/bin/play. Sorry about the indentation; for whatever reason, it is being destroyed by the blog, but you get the idea.


#!/bin/bash
case "$1" in
train)
mpg321 /usr/local/trainsounds/main.mp3
;;
song)
/usr/bin/play /usr/local/trainsounds/traindreams.flac
;;
*)
cd $HOME/recordings
exec aplay `ls -tr| tail -n 1`
;;
esac

So, Jacob can run just “play”, which will play back his most recent recording. As something of a bonus, the history of recordings is saved for us to listen to later. If he types “play train”, there is the sound of a train passing. And, finally, “play song” plays Always a Train in My Dreams by Steve Gillette (I heard it on the radio once and bought the CD).

Some of these commands kick off sound playing in the background, so here is /usr/local/bin/bequiet:


#!/bin/bash
killall mpg321 &> /dev/null
killall play &> /dev/null
killall aplay &> /dev/null
killall cw &> /dev/null

A Proud Dad

I saw this on my computer screen the other day, and I’ve got to say it really warmed my heart. I’ll explain below if it doesn’t provoke that reaction for you.

Evidence a 4-year-old has been using my computer

So here’s why that made me happy. Well for one, it was the first time Jacob had left stuff on my computer that I found later. And of course he left his name there.

But moreover, he’s learning a bit about the Unix shell. sl is a command that displays an animated steam locomotive. I taught him how to use the semicolon to combine commands. So he has realized that he can combine calls to sl with the semicolon to get a series of a LOT of steam trains all at once. And was very excited about this discovery.

Also he likes how error messages start with the word “bash”.

rdiff-backup, ZFS, and rsync scripts

rdiff-backup vs. ZFS

As I’ve been writing about backups, I’ve gone ahead and run some tests with rdiff-backup. I have been using rdiff-backup personally for many years now — probably since 2002, when I packaged it up for Debian. It’s a nice, stable system, but I always like to look at other options for things every so often.

rdiff-backup stores an uncompressed current mirror of the filesystem, similar to rsync. History is achieved by the use of compressed backwards binary deltas generated by rdiff (using the rsync algorithm). So, you can restore the current copy very easily — a simple cp will do if you don’t need to preserve permissions. rdiff-backup restores previous copies by applying all necessary binary deltas to generate the previous version.

Things I like about rdiff-backup:

  1. Bandwidth-efficient
  2. Reasonably space-efficient, especially where history is concerned
  3. Easily scriptable and nice CLI
  4. Unlike tools such as duplicity, there is no need to periodically run full backups — old backups can be deleted without impacting the ability to restore more current backups

Things I don’t like about it:

  1. Speed. It can be really slow. Deleting 3 months’ worth of old history takes hours. It has to unlink vast numbers of files — and that’s pretty much it, but it does it really slowly. Restores, backups, etc. are all slow as well. Even just getting a list of your increment sizes so you’d know how much space would be saved can take a very long time.
  2. The current backup copy is stored without any kind of compression, which is not at all space-efficient
  3. It creates vast numbers of little files that take forever to delete or summarize

So I thought I would examine how efficient ZFS would be. I wrote a script that would replay the rdiff-backup history — first it would rsync the current copy onto the ZFS filesystem and make a ZFS snapshot. Then each previous version was processed by my script (rdiff-backup’s files are sufficiently standard that a shell script can process them), and a ZFS snapshot created after each. This lets me directly compare the space used by rdiff-backup to that used by ZFS using actual history.

I enabled gzip-3 compression and block dedup in ZFS.

My backups were nearly 1TB in size and the amount of space I had available for ZFS was roughly 600GB, so I couldn’t test all of them. As it happened, I tested the ones that were the worst-case scenario for ZFS: my photos, music collection, etc. These files had very little duplication and very little compressibility. Plus a backup of my regular server that was reasonably compressible.

The total size of the data backed up with rdiff-backup was 583 GB. With ZFS, this came to 498GB. My dedup ratio on this was only 1.05 (meaning 5% or 25GB saved). The compression ratio was 1.12 (60GB saved). The combined ratio was 1.17 (85GB saved). Interestingly 498 + 85 = 583.

Remember that the data under test here was mostly a worst-case scenario for ZFS. It would probably have done better had I had the time to throw the rest of my dataset at it (such as the 60GB backup of my iPod, which would have mostly deduplicated with the backup of my music server).

One problem with ZFS is that dedup is very memory-hungry. This is common knowledge and it is advertised that you need to use roughly 2GB of RAM per TB of disk when using dedup. I don’t have quite that much to dedicate to it, so ZFS got VERY slow and thrashed the disk a lot after the ARC grew to about 300MB. I found some tweakables in zfsrc and the zfs command that let me tweak the ARC cache to grow bigger. But the machine in question only has 2GB RAM, and is doing lots of other things as well, so this barely improved anything. Note that this dedup RAM requirement is not out of line with what is expected from these sorts of solutions.

Even if I got absolutely stellar dedup ratio of 2:1, that would get me at most 1TB. The cost of buying a 1TB disk is less than the cost of upgrading my system to 4GB RAM, so dedup isn’t worth it here.

I think the lesson is: think carefully about where dedup makes sense. If you’re storing a bunch of nearly-identical virtual machine images — the sort of canonical use case for this — go for it. A general fileserver — well, maybe you should just add more disk instead of more RAM.

Then that raises the question: if I don’t need dedup from ZFS, do I bother with it at all, or just use ext4 and LVM snapshots? I think ZFS still makes sense, given its built-in support for compression and very fast snapshots — LVM snapshots are known to cause serious degradation to write performance once enabled, which ZFS doesn’t.

So I plan to switch my backups to use ZFS. A few observations on this:

  1. Some testing suggests that the time to delete a few months of old snapshots will be a minute or two with ZFS compared to hours with rdiff-backup.
  2. ZFS has shown itself to be more space-efficient than rdiff-backup, even without dedup enabled.
  3. There are clear performance and convenience wins with ZFS.
  4. Backup Scripts

    So now comes the question of backup scripts. rsync is obviously a pretty nice choice here — and if used with –inplace perhaps even will play friendly with ZFS snapshots even if dedup is off. But let’s say I’m backing up a few machines at home, or perhaps dozens at work. There is a need to automate all of this. Specifically, there’s a need to:

    1. Provide scheduling, making sure that we don’t hammer the server with 30 clients all at once
    2. Provide for “run before” jobs to do things like snapshot databases
    3. Be silent on success and scream loudly via emails to administrators on any kind of error… and keep backing up other systems when there is an error
    4. Create snapshots and provide an automated way to remove old snapshots (or mount them for reading, as ZFS-fuse doesn’t support the .zfs snapshot directory yet)

    To date I haven’t found anything that looks suitable. I found a shell script system called rsbackup that does a large part of this, but something about using a script whose homepage is a forum makes me less than 100% confident.

    On the securing the backups front, rsync comes with a good-looking rrsync script (inexplicably installed under /usr/share/doc/rsync/scripts instead of /usr/bin on Debian) that can help secure the SSH authorization. GNU rush also looks like a useful restricted shell.

Research on deduplicating disk-based and cloud backups

Yesterday, I wrote about backing up to the cloud. I specifically was looking at cloud backup services. I’ve been looking into various options there, but also various options for disk-based backups. I’d like to have both onsite and offsite backups, so both types of backup are needed. Also, it is useful to think about how the two types of backups can be combined with minimal overhead.

For the onsite backups, I’d want to see:

  1. Preservation of ownership, permissions, etc.
  2. Preservation of symlinks and hardlinks
  3. Space-efficient representation of changes — ideally binary deltas or block-level deduplication
  4. Ease of restoring
  5. Support for backing up Linux and Windows machines

Deduplicating Filesystems for Local Storage

Although I initially thought of block-level deduplicating file systems as something to use for offsite backups, they could also make an excellent choice for onsite disk-based backups.

rsync-based dedup backups

One way to use them would be to simply rsync data to them each night. Since copies are essentially free, we could do (or use some optimized version of) cp -r current snapshot/2011-01-20 or some such to save off historic backups. Moreover, we’d get dedup both across and within machines. And, many of these can use filesystem-level compression.

The real upshot of this is that the entire history of the backups can be browsed as a mounted filesystem. It would be fast and easy to find files, especially when users call about that file that they deleted at some point in the past but they don’t remember when, exactly what it was called, or exactly where it was stored. We can do a lot more with find and grep to locate these things than we could do with tools in Bacula (or any other backup program) restore console. Since it is a real mounted filesystem, we could also do fun things like make tarballs of it at will, zip parts up, scp them back to the file server, whatever. We could potentially even give users direct access to their files to restore things they need for themselves.

The downside of this approach is that rsync can’t store all the permissions unless it’s running as root on the system. Wrappers such as rdup around rsync could help with that. Another downside is that there isn’t a central scheduling/statistics service. We wouldn’t want the backup system to be hammered by 20 servers trying to send it data at once. So there’d be an element of rolling our own scripts, though not too bad. I’d have preferred not to authorize a backup server with root-level access to dozens of machines, but may be inescapable in this instance.

Bacula and dedup

The other alternative I thought of system such as Bacula with disk-based “volumes”. A Bacula volume is normally a tape, but Bacula can just write them to disk files. This lets us use the powerful Bacula scheduling engine, logging service, pre-backup and post-backup jobs, etc. Normally this would be an egregious waste of disk space. Bacula, like most tape-heritage programs, will write out an entire new copy of a file if even one byte changes. I had thought that I could let block-level dedupe reduce the storage size of Bacula volumes, but after looking at the Bacula block format spec, this won’t be possible as each block will have timestamps and such in it.

The good things about this setup revolve around using the central Bacula director. We need only install bacula-fd on each server to be backed up, and it has a fairly limited set of things it can do. Bacula already has built-in support for defining simple or complicated retention policies. Its director will email us if there is a problem with anything. And its logs and catalog are already extensive and enable us to easily find out things such as how long backups take, how much space they consume, etc. And it backs up Windows machines intelligently and comprehensively in addition to POSIX ones.

The downsides are, of course, that we don’t have all the features we’d get from having the entire history on the filesystem all at once, and far less efficient use of space. Not only that, but recovering from a disaster would require a more extensive bootstrapping process.

A hybrid option may be possible: automatically unpacking bacula backups after they’ve run onto the local filesystem. Dedupe should ensure this doesn’t take additional space — if the Bacula blocksize aligns with the filesystem blocksize. This is certainly not a given however. It may also make sense to use Bacula for Windows and rsync/rdup for Linux systems.

This seems, however, rather wasteful and useless.

Evaluation of deduplicating filesystems

I set up and tested three deduplicating filesystems available for Linux: S3QL, SDFS, and zfs-fuse. I did not examine lessfs. I ran a similar set of tests for each:

  1. Copy /usr/bin into the fs with tar -cpf - /usr/bin | tar -xvpf - -C /mnt/testfs
  2. Run commands to sync/flush the disk cache. Evaluate time and disk used at this point.
  3. Rerun the tar command, putting the contents into a slightly different path in the test filesystem. This should consume very little additional space since the files will have already been there. This will validate that dedupe works as expected, and provide a hint about its efficiency.
  4. Make a tarball of both directories from the dedup filesystem, writing it to /dev/zero (to test read performance)

I did not attempt to flush read caches during this, but I did flush write caches. The test system has 8GB RAM, 5GB of which was free or in use by a cache. The CPU is a Core2 6420 at 2.13GHz. The filesystems which created files atop an existing filesystem had ext4 mounted noatime beneath them. ZFS was mounted on an LVM LV. I also benchmarked native performance on ext4 as a baseline. The data set consists of 3232 files and 516MB. It contains hardlinks and symlinks.

Here are my results. Please note the comments below as SDFS could not accurately complete the test.

Test ext4 S3QL SDFS zfs-fuse
First copy 1.59s 6m20s 2m2s 0m25s
Sync/Flush 8.0s 1m1s 0s 0s
Second copy+sync N/A 0m48s 1m48s 0m24s
Disk usage after 1st copy 516MB 156MB 791MB 201MB
Disk usage after 2nd copy N/A 157MB 823MB 208MB
Make tarball 0.2s 1m1s 2m22s 0m54s
Max RAM usage N/A 150MB 350MB 153MB
Compression none lzma none gzip-2

It should be mentioned that these tests pretty much ruled out SDFS. SDFS doesn’t appear to support local compression, and it severely bloated the data store, which was much larger than the original data. Moreover, it permitted any user to create and modify files, even if the permissions bits said that the user couldn’t. tar gave many errors unpacking symlinks onto the SDFS filesystem, and du -s on the result threw up errors as well. Besides that, I noted that find found 10 fewer files than in my source data. Between the huge memory consumption, the data integrity concerns, and inefficient disk storage, SDFS is out of the running for this project.

S3QL is optimized for storage to S3, though it can also store its files locally or on an sftp server — a nice touch. I suspect part of its performance problem stems from being designed for network backends, and using slow compression algorithms. S3QL worked fine, however, and produced no problems. Creating a checkpoint using s3qlcp (faster than cp since it doesn’t have to read the data from the store) took 16s.

zfs-fuse appears to be the most-used ZFS implementation on Linux at the moment. I set up a 2GB ZFS pool for this test, and set dedupe=on and compress=gzip-2. When I evaluated compression in the past, I hadn’t looked at lzjb. I found a blog post comparing lzjb to the gzip options supported by zfs and wound up using gzip-2 for this test.

ZFS really shone here. Compared to S3QL, it took 25s instead of over 6 minutes to copy the data over — and took only 28% more space. I suspect that if I selected gzip -9 compression it would have been closer both in time and space to S3QL. But creating a ZFS snapshot was nearly instantaneous. Although ZFS-fuse probably doesn’t have as many users as ZFS on Solaris, still it is available in Debian, and has a good backing behind it. I feel safer using it than I do using S3QL. So I think ZFS wins this comparison.

I spent quite some time testing ZFS snapshots, which are instantaneous. (Incidentally, ZFS-fuse can’t mount them directly as documented, so you create a clone of the snapshot and mount that.) They worked out as well as could be hoped. Due to dedupe, even deleting and recreating the entire content of the original filesystem resulted in less than 1MB additional storage used. I also tested creating multiple filesystems in the zpool, and confirmed that dedupe even works between filesystems.

Incidentally — wow, ZFS has a ton of awesome features. I see why you OpenSolaris people kept looking at us Linux folks with a sneer now. Only our project hasn’t been killed by a new corporate overlord, so guess that maybe didn’t work out so well for you… .

The Cloud Tie-In

This discussion leaves another discussion: what to do about offsite backups? Assuming for the moment that I want to back them up over the Internet to some sort of cloud storage facility, there are about 3 options:

  1. Get an Amazon EC2 instance with EBS storage and rsync files to it. Perhaps run ZFS on that thing.
  2. Use a filesystem that can efficiently store data in S3 or Cloud Files (S3QL is the only contender here)
  3. Use a third-party backup product (JungleDisk appears to be the leading option)

There is something to be said for using a different tool for offsite backups — if there is some tool-level issue, that could be helpful.

One of the nice things about JungleDisk is that bandwidth is free, and disk is the same $0.15/GB-mo that RackSpace normally charges. JungleDisk also does block-level dedup, and has a central management interface. This all spells “nice” for us.

The only remaining question would be whether to just use JungleDisk to back up the backup server, or to put it on each individual machine as well. If it just backs up the backup server, then administrative burdens are lower; we can back everything there up by default and just not worry about it. On the other hand, if there is a problem with our main backups, we could be really stuck. So I’d say I’m leaning towards ZFS plus some sort of rsync solution and JungleDisk for offsite.

I had two people suggest CrashPlan Pro on my blog. It looks interesting, but is a very closed product which makes me nervous. I like using standard tools and formats — gives me more peace of mind, control, and recovery options. CrashPlan Pro supports multiple destinations and says that they do cloud hosting, but don’t list pricing anywhere. So I’ll probably not mess with it.

I’m still very interested in what comments people may have on all this. Let me know!

Wikis, Amateur Radio, and Debian

As I have been getting involved with amateur radio this year, I’ve been taking notes on what I’m learning about certain things: tips from people on rigging up a bicycle antenna to achieve a 40-mile range, setting up packet radio in Linux, etc. I have long run a personal, private wiki where I put such things.

But I really wanted a convenient place to put this stuff in public. There was no reason to keep it private. In fact, I wanted to share with others what I’ve learned. And, as I wanted to let others add their tips if they wish, I set up a public MoinMoin instance on . So far, most of my attention has focused on the amateur radio section of it

This has worked out pretty well for me. Sometimes I will cut and paste tips from emails into there, and then after trying them out, edit them into a more coherent summary based on my experiences.

Now then, on to packet radio and Debian. Packet radio is a digital communications mode that runs on the amateur radio bands. It is a routable, networking protocol that typically runs at 300bps, 1200bps, and 9600bps. My packet radio page gives a better background on it, but essentially AX.25 — the packet protocol — is similar to a scaled-down TCP/IP. One interesting thing about packet is that, since it can use the HF bands, can have direct transcontinental wireless links. More common are links spanning 30-50 miles on VHF and UHF, as well as those going across a continent on HF.

Linux is the only operating system I know of that has AX.25 integrated as a first-class protocol in the kernel. You can create AX.25 sockets and use them with the APIs you’re familiar with already. Not only that, but the Linux AX.25 stack is probably the best there is, and it interfaces easily with TCP/IP — there are global standards for encapsulating TCP/IP within AX.25 and AX.25 within UDP, and both are supported on Linux. Yes, I have telnetted to a machine to work on it over VHF. Of Linux distributions, Debian appears to have the best AX.25 stack built-in.

The AX.25 support in Linux is great, but it’s rather under-documented. So I set up a page for packet radio on Linux. I’ve had a great deal of fun with this. It’s amazing what you can do running a real networking protocol at 300bps over long-distance radio. I’ve had real-time conversations with people, connected to their personal BBS and sent them mail, and even use AX.25 “nodes” (think of them as a kind of router or bridge; you can connect in to them and the connect back out on the same or different frequencies to extend your reach) to connect out to systems that I can’t reach directly.

MoinMoin has worked out well for this. It has an inviting theme and newbie-friendly interface (I want to encourage drive-by contributions).

Debconf10

Debconf10 ended a week ago, and I’m only now finding some time to write about it. Funny how it works that way sometimes.

Anyhow, the summary of Debconf has to be: this is one amazing conference. Despite being involved with Debian for years, this was my first Debconf. I often go to one conference a year that my employer sends me to. In the past, it’s often been OSCon, which was very good, but Debconf was much better than that even. For those of you considering Debconf11 next year, perhaps this post will help you make your decision.

First of all, as might be expected from a technical conference, Debconf was of course informative. I particularly appreciated the enterprise track, which was very relevant to me. Unlike many other conferences, Debconf has some rooms specifically set aside for BoFs. With a day or two warning, you can get your event in one of those rooms on the official schedule. That exact thing happened with a virtualization BoF — I thought the topic was interesting, given the recent shifts in various virtualization options. So I emailed the conference mailing list, and we got an event on the schedule a short while later — and had a fairly large group turn out to discuss it.

The “hallway track” — conversations struck up with others in hallways or hacklabs — also was better at Debconf than other conferences. Partly that may be because, although there were fewer people at Debconf, they very much tended to be technical people whose interests aligned with my own. Partly it’s probably also because the keysigning party, which went throughout the conference, encouraged meeting random people. That was a great success, by the way.

So Debconf succeeded at informing, which is perhaps why many people go to these things. But it also inspired, especially Eben Moglen’s lecture. Who would have thought I’d come away from a conference enthused about the very real potential we have to alter the dynamics of some of the largest companies in the world today by using Free Software to it’s greatest potential?

And, of course, I had fun at Debconf. Meeting new people — or, more commonly, finally meeting in person people I’d known for years — was great. I got a real sense of the tremendously positive aspect of Debian’s community, which I must admit I have sometimes overlooked during certain mailing list discussions. This was a community of people, not just a bunch of folks attending a random conference for a week, and that point underlined a lot of things that happened.

Of course, it wasn’t 100% perfect, and it won’t ever be. But still, my thanks to everyone that organized, volunteered, and attended Debconf. I’m now wishing I’d been to more of them, and hope to attend next year’s.

Jacob has a new computer — and a favorite shell

Earlier today, I wrote about building a computer with Jacob, our 3.5-year-old, and setting him up with a Linux shell.

We did that this evening, and wow — he loves it. While the Debian Installer was running, he kept begging to type, so I taught him how to hit Alt-F2 and fired up cat for him. That was a lot of fun. But even more fun was had once the system was set up. I installed bsdgames and taught him how to use worm. worm is a simple snake-like game where you use the arrow keys to “eat” the numbers. That was a big hit, as Jacob likes numbers right now. He watched me play it a time or two, then tried it himself. Of course he crashed into the wall pretty quickly, which exits the game.

I taught him how to type “worm” at the computer, then press Enter to start it again. Suffice it to say he now knows how to spell worm very well. Yes, that’s right: Jacob’s first ever Unix command was…. worm.

He’d play the game, and cackle if he managed to eat a number. If he crashed into a wall, he’d laugh much harder and run over to the other side of the room.

Much as worm was a hit, the Linux shell was even more fun. He sometimes has a problem with the keyboard repeat, and one time typed “worrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrm”. I tried to pronounce that for him, which he thought was hilarious. He was about to backspace to fix it, when I asked, “Jacob, what will happen if you press Enter without fixing it?” He looked at me with this look of wonder and excitement, as if to say, “Hey, I never thought of that. Let’s see!” And a second later, he pressed Enter.

The result, of course, was:

-bash: worrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrm: command not found

“Dad, what did it do?”

I read the text back, and told him it means that the computer doesn’t know what worrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrm means. Much laughter. At that point, it became a game. He’d bang at random letters, and finally press Enter. I’d read what it said. Pretty soon he was recognizing the word “bash”, and I heard one time, “Dad, it said BASH again!!!” Sometimes if he’d get semicolons at the right place, he’d get two or three “bashes”. That was always an exciting surprise. He had more fun at the command line than he did with worm, and I think at least half of it was because the shell was called bash.

He took somewhat of an interest in the hardware part earlier in the evening, though not quite as much. He was interested in opening up other computers to take parts out of them, but bored quickly. The fact that Terah was cooking supper probably had something to do with that. He really enjoyed the motherboard (and learned that word), and especially the CPU fan. He loved to spin it with his finger. He thought it interesting that there would be a fan inside his computer.

When it came time to assign a hostname, I told Jacob he could name his computer. Initially he was confused. Terah suggested he could name it “kitty”, but he didn’t go for it. After a minute’s thought, he said, “I will name it ‘Grandma Marla.'” Confusion from us — did he really understand what he was saying? “You want to name your computer ‘Grandma Marla?'” “Yep. That will be silly!” “Sure you don’t want to name it Thomas?” “That would be silly! No. I will name my computer ‘Grandma Marla.”” OK then. My DNS now has an entry for grandma-marla. I had wondered what he would come up with. You never know with a 3-year-old!

It was a lot of fun to see that sense of wonder and experimentation at work. I remember it from the TRS-80 and DOS machine, when I would just try random things to see what they would do. It is lots of fun to watch it in Jacob too, and hear the laughter as he discovers something amusing.

We let Jacob stay up 2 hours past his bedtime to enjoy all the excitement. Tomorrow the computer moves to his room. Should be loads of excitement then too.