Multi-user multi-head setup

Purely out of curiosity, I would like to create the following setup:
Computers: 1 (i.e. 1 motherboard)
Physical displays: N
Keyboards, mice: N
Processor: >= N cores
...and have a separate tty allocated to each monitor/mouse/keyboard group such that N non-root users can simultaneously work on a single box, in independent desktop environments and unable to interfere with each other. The processor criterion is to ensure that each user has at least one core "of their own" via affinity masking, so no one user can monopolise CPU resources. RAM and I/O resources are something that I'll think about at a later date.
The idea is to allow multiple non-root users to simultaneously work on one computer in such a way that they cannot interfere with each other's sessions in any destructive way (e.g. reboot, kill processes, hijack session, etc).
Could anyone point me in the right direction ( configurations / supported graphics vendors / kernel parameters ) for this?
I have no real use for this (particularly with how cheap VDI is), it is purely an academic curiosity.
Last edited by windows_me (2014-01-29 21:12:03)

@Nattgew:
Cheap USB video adapters will be fine for testing, and I can probably bag some powerful old Radeons (48xx) on the cheap, each of which will drive at least 2 screens. Alternatively, I could probably daisychain a bunch of higher-end cheap monitors (e.g. Dell U2312) via DisplayPort.
@slithery:
Cheers! I got nothing but flaming when I asked on the Ubuntu forums, you've solved the problem in a single word ("multiseat")!

Similar Messages

IPhone/iTunes/AppleTV/iPod - Multi-User, Multi-Device, Multi-Issues

*The Setup* -
iMac Intel - 2.33/2G Rm/700G HD
OS - 10.4.10
iTunes - 7.4.2
2 iPhone (8g) - 1.1.1
1 iPod (60g) - 1.2.1
2 Apple TV's - 1.1
Shared Music/Photos
Connected via USB through Self-powered USB Hub
Wireless - 802.11n Apple Extreme
*Shared Files*
Music/Photos placed in Shared Folder outside of each users Home Folder. Permissions set to system with r/w for both uses who have Admin rights.
iTunes library is independent, allowing for creation of own playlist. Additions to library are done by drag/drop of Music folder to import added songs/video
iPhoto library is setup in the shared folder as well with permissions updated for all photos to system with r/w for both users.
*The Issues*
1. _First to sync, first to own_ - Once one user syncs iphone to iPhoto, second user can not. "Not Enough Permissions" error appears when second user attempts to do so.  Deleting iPod photo cache each time iphone is sync'd seems to be only work around.
2. _In the Sync, down the drain_ - I have four devices that could be syncing at one time, 2 Apple TVs, 1 iPod and 1 iPhone.. I am finding that if all are syncing at the same time iTunes becomes unstable and crashes.  Once iPhone stops syncing issue resolves and iPod and Apple TVs complete without issue.
3. _You own what you import_ - This is more of a request than a issue. Photo's brought in to the same shared iPhoto library by difference users on the same system are owned by that user, though the library is set "system" rights, new photos are not updated with this setting.   I would to see a preference for this option in iPhoto and iTunes, when library's are shared, new imports are updated to reflect that state.

I finally found this. It is the same question and I didn't find it at the time I opened my discussion. https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4431992?start=0&tstart=0
Looks like I am not the only one to be locked out of iTunes Match

Multi-user, Multi-mac, single-storage best practices?

I wouldn't share the MacBookPro so my wife finally replaced her PC with a new iMac. We want to store our big music collection in one place (either the iMac or external USB disk. Both machines presently use WiFi connectivity through our older round AiportExtreme, though I'd consider upgrading if the Airport Disk sharing would make this simple. We also presently use Airport Express to play music from the laptop to our home audio system and will continue to use the laptop for this. Presently we each have one library for laptop/iGadgets. Ideally we could share the library files across machines (in something akin to an NFS/Celerra mount in the Unix world) so that we don't have to add music more than once per person and I could recover laptop disk space. Is it possible to point multiple machines at the same library xml/itl files, or at least synch them somehow (maybe dotmac) to both machines and how would one configure that? My knowledge of mac networking is very small, but I'm tech-savvy in the Win/Unix world. Is the network latency prohibitively slow, particularly when pulling files through WiFi from remote disk and playing back remotely to AirPort Express? We don't want it to stop every 5 seconds to buffer. I welcome suggestions for the best way to proceed. Thanks in advance.

dead thread

Multi-head setup without xorg.conf

I'm using the newer method of running X without an xorg.conf and want a traditional multi-head setup (a "Normal multi-head" method, allowing a separate X session on each of the monitors).
I would use this to have a different window manager run on each of the screens (something like the following for OpenBox: DISPLAY=:0.1 openbox), perhaps with the aid of Switchscreen.
XRandR will give me one big virtual screen (and is currently how I'm doing it, combined with xnest), but that's not what I want. Any ideas?

WooHoo !
awkwood - You Rock ! I feel like an idiot for not paying closer attention to your first post. I finally realized what you were saying and figured out how to do the downgrade.
If it's 2.12.0 I'd suggest trying 2.11.0 instead.
The most recent update borked my dual display with a similar error message but 2.11 works fine.
I don't use an xorg.conf.
So essentially this seems to be a bug with version 2.12 of the xf86-video-intel driver. I downgraded to ver 2.11 and everything works perfectly. I am running dual monitors at full resolution with no fuss. So again awkwood I thank you !
For other Arch Newbies who have this issue in the mean time until they fix the bug, this is how I did the downgrade.
Step 1:
download the 2.11 package from the link below
http://arm.konnichi.com/extra/os/i686/x … pkg.tar.xz
Step 2:
Open a terminal and cd to the directory where you saved the file
$ cd /home/$USERNAME/Downloads
Step 3:
Use pacman to install the package
sudo pacman -U xf86-video-intel-2.11.0-2-i686.pkg.tar.xz
Finally reboot. When you log back in everything should work fine
Again thanks to awkwood as well as karol, blind, Inxsible and everyone else for their help. Everyone here is so helpful, I am defiantly an Arch user for life. Hopefully they will fix the bug in the next version of the driver. My next step is to see about filling a bug report.

How to provide access to multiple users connected to a Dumb switch? (multi-auth/multi-domain)

Good morning everybody,
I am writing on behalf of not being able to implement a desired outcome in our company network. In fact the situation is as follows:
What I want to do is to be able to authenticate users (802.1x authentication) in our company radius server and authorize them access by having a dynamic VLAN assignment in a multi-user environment on one and the same port of a Cisco 2960 switch. So far, the authentication and authorization has been working completely smoothly (there are no problems with itself). The concept involves the configuration of both DATA and VOICE VLANs as I there is also phone authentication implemented. In order to simulate this environment I introduce a Dumb switch connected to my Cisco 2960 Catalyst.
What I have successfully managed to get to work so far is this:
1) On one switch port I have tried the “authentication host-mode multi-domain” and it worked perfectly for a PC behind a telephone, or with one PC connected to a the dumb switch + the telephone connected to another port of the dumb switch. Logically it is the same situation as there is a separation in two domains – DATA and VOICE. Bellow is an output from show authentication sessions for this scenario.
Interface MAC Address Method Domain Status Session ID
Fa0/23 0021.9b62.b79b dot1x DATA Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F3008E (user1)
Fa0/23 0015.655c.b912 dot1x VOICE Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F9009F (phone)
2) On the other hand, when I try the same scenario with the “authentication host-mode multi-auth”, the switch still separates the traffic in two domains and is able to authenticate all users, AS LONG AS they are in the same VLAN.
show authentication sessions:
Interface MAC Address Method Domain Status Session ID
Fa0/23 0021.9b62.b79b dot1x DATA Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F3008E (user1)
Fa0/23 b888.e3eb.ebac dot1x DATA Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F8008C (user2)
Fa0/23 0015.655c.b912 dot1x VOICE Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F9009F (phone)
However, I cannot succeed authentication of many users from DIFFERENT VLANs, neither in multi-auth nor in multi-domain modes.
What I want to get is an output like this:
Interface MAC Address Method Domain Status Session ID
Fa0/23 0021.9b62.b79b dot1x DATA Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F3008E (user1)
Fa0/23 b888.e3eb.ebac dot1x DATA Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F8008C (user2)
Fa0/23 0015.655c.b912 dot1x VOICE Authz Success C0A8FF69000000F9009F (phone)
I want the switch to authenticate the users anytime they connect to itself and for them to have an instant access to the network. (I tell this because I tried scenario 1) with multi-domain mode and authentication violation replace, and it worked but, two users never had access to the “Internet” simultaneously!!!
The configuration of the interface connected to the Dumb switch is as follows.
interface FastEthernet0/x
description Connection to DUMBswitch
switchport mode access
switchport voice vlan XXX
switchport port-security maximum 10
switchport port-security
switchport port-security violation protect
authentication host-mode multi-auth
authentication priority dot1x
authentication port-control auto
authentication timer reauthenticate 4000
authentication violation replace
dot1x pae authenticator
dot1x timeout tx-period 10
spanning-tree portfast
The way I see it is explained in the following steps:
- PC1 connects to the Dumb switch. This causes the Cisco switch to authenticate user1. This creates an auth. session with its MAC address linked to a domain DATA.
- When PC2 connects to the Dumb switch, this causes the violation replace which replaces the recent authenticated MAC address with the MAC of PC2. I would like it once authenticated to appear in the authentication sessions with a link to a new DATA domain linked to the VLAN assigned from the RADIUS server.
Is this possible? I think (in theory) this is the only way to provide authenticated access to multiple users connecting through Dumb switch to the network.
Has anybody ever succeeded in such a configuration example and if yes, I would be love to get some help in doing so?
Thank you
Stoimen Hristov

Hi Stoimen,
I have done a setup similar to yours with the only exception being VLAN assignment. When I used dACLs only, it makes things somewhat easier as the VLAN no longer matters. Remember that the switchport is in access mode and will only allow a single VLAN across it (with the exception of the voice VLAN). I think that is the real cause of your problem.
From what I can see, you have 2 options available to you:
1) Use dACLs instead of VLAN assignment. This means that an access list will be downloaded from the radius server straight to the authenticated user's session. I have tested this and it works perfectly. Just Google Cisco IBNS quick reference guide and look for the section that deals with Low Impact mode.
2) Get rid of the dumb switches and use managed switches throughout your network. Dumb switches will always be a point of weakness in your network because they have no intelligence to do advanced security features like port security, 802.1x, DHCP snooping, etc.
Hopefully someone else will chime in with another option.
Xavier

10.6.2 SMB - QB 2005 PC won't run in Multi User

Hi there,
This is a pretty specific issue but i'll throw this out anyway.
I setup a brand new 10.6.2 server alongside our old 10.4.11 server.
I cloned the contents of the "shared data" from the old box to the new one.
We have had the SMB service running for Quickbooks 2005 running on 2 PCs (Xp Pro clients), shared via QB's "Multi User" mode.
The new server's SMB share, identical in permissions etc to the old one, will not allow QB to open the file in Multi User mode. It gives an error to the effect of "Your company file has been damaged". My attempts to repair the QB file had no effect.
If I copy the same company file back onto our old Tiger Server's SMB share, it works fine. I assume this is simply a difference in Samba versions, but I have no idea how to troubleshoot it.
I obviously have a workaround for now, but it's less than ideal to have an entire Xserve on to share a Quickbooks file.
Any insight would be appreciated.
~p

Bumped into this article; I'll post back after i give it a shot.
http://edoceo.com/liber/network-samba-quickbooks
The gist of it:
"the directories that will be the root of the share must be owned by the group that the users who will access are in and they must be able to write"

BC4J - Multi-User Environment

Can someone explain, how to setup a BC4J project in a multi-user environment. In my case I want to create 50-100 Users in the database (I don't prefer creating a table and storing usernames and passwords in that table as in Auctions example). Do I need to create a connection.properties with 50-100 user connections? How does the connection pooling work in such a case. I am sure that someone might have went through this process. I need some input.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Virinchi

http://technet.oracle.com:89/ubb/Forum2/HTML/006025.html

Multi User Development Best Practise

Experts,
We are very new to obiee and trying to setup multi developer environment. What is the best practices to follow when we are starting a multiuser development. Through my research i found out multiple solutions, Let me what is proven and best.
Practice A: Configuration on MUD environment as per documentation, and Developer works on RPD through a Check in and Check out process. Then all the report development goes through DEV Web URL.
Practice B: Every developer works on his box, and then Admin takes the RPD and catalog, and then he merges with central RPD and catalog which is running on DEV box using tools like RPD merge feature and Catalog Manager.
Let me know your comments making decision on which practice to follow. I really appreciate your help.
Dan

http://www.oracle.com/technology/obe/obe_bi/bi_ee_1013/mude/mude.htm
http://oraclebizint.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/oracle-bi-ee-101332-multi-user-development-of-repositories-mud/
Regards
Goran
http://108obiee.blogspot.com

UPK11 - multi-user environment - manage author permissions - help

We are configuring our UPK 11 multi-user environment.
As we have it set, the "everyone" group has modify access to all folders.
I would like to have a few admins have modify access to the system folder and everyone else be read only.
Here's my dilemma -
My admin profile is also a part of the everyone group - so if I set the permissions on the everyone group to read only, that effects the admin login as well.
The documentation says that if I set up an author with explicit folder permissions, that they are not included in the everyone group, but everytime I try, they are added (irrevocably) to the everyone group before I can even assign an explicit permission.
I tried to set the everyone group to read only and nearly hobbled my admin account.
Can someone who has managed authors in a UPK 11 multii-user environment send out some tips?
I'm not understanding the documentation well enough to make headway.
[email protected]

Hi Paul,
I recently performed an implementation of UPK 11 at a client and had to show one of their employees how to administer the security surrounding profiles and authors.
The group "Everyone" is default, and each person will belong to that group. It seems that when a person is assigned to another group/with author-specific permissions, it will override that which is set to the "Everyone" group.
What I normally suggest (and implement) is that you modularise your security (separate the authors into their respective departments), and then create those departments as groups, and then assign permissions as required. Lets use an example - it assumes you are logged in as an admin user:
I create 3 folders (where 4 and 5 are defaults):
1. HR
2. FIN
3. CS
4. Administrators
5. Everyone
Each author is defaulted to number 5, and all administrators should be included in group 4.
Now the goal is to prevent HR and FIN from modifying CS, and vice-versa for the other two groups.
You will see in your library that the root is defined as "/". Firstly, ensure that the Administrators group has Modify access to this folder (Administration --> Manage Groups --> Permissions). I think you need to click on edit, then click on the "Add" button (under permissions), and choose the root folder "/" - ensure it has modify - by default this value should already exist. This now ensures that the security is filtered down to all sub-ordinate folders that exist under the root folder - you do not need to manually assign "modify" permissions to each folder for the Administrator group, as you have already done so at root level.
You will also notice that there is a "Members/Users" tab (can't remember off the top of my head which), and this allows you to select the profiles/authors that have Administrator group priviledges - ensure the correct users are selected.
I normally leave the "Everyone" group as it is - do this for now, ensure everyone is included in it, and only modify after you have implemented and tested your security structure if needs be - normally the other group permissions override the "Everyone" group permissions.
Next step is to assign department specific permissions to the 3 folders we created. Navigate to Administration --> Manage Groups, and ensure that you begin by editing the first department group (HR) - create the group if not already done, then edit (little pencil logo). You would like all HR users to have full modify access to their folder only, but they must not be able to mess around with the other two departments or the "System", "Getting started with UPK" and "/" folders. Under permissions, click on the Add button, and ensure that the folder "HR" has modify priviledge. Add the remaining 4 folders (CS, FIN, System, Getting started with UPK), and assign either Read or Read/View permission - this will ensure all other folders cannot be modified by HR users. Add the relevant HR users to the group under the "Members/Users" tab.
Apply the same for FIN and CS respectively.
Now you could get to a point where you may need cross-departmental access for a few users (FIN may need to access some HR content). I recommed that you do this on the user level, and not the group level, as you will limit who can access other departments. Navigate to Administration --> Manage Authors. Click on the specific user that will require access to another department. Edit his profile and under the permissions tab, ensure that he has required access to the other department folder (or sub-folders only) by adding and assigning the priveledge. This should ovveride the group security set for that specific department - but only for this user!
Test by attempting to create content in an un-authorised folder (when logged in as a normal user). Test admin account by creating content in each folder. If it works - you will no longer need to modify "Everyone", as your permissions are defined under the other groups. I hope this all makes sense?
Thats it in a nutshell really.
I hope that this helps, and feel free to get back to me if you are still unsure?
Regards,
Greig

Multi-user is disabled!

Hi,
I did something foolish by locking myself out of the system. Currently, I am only able to login as a single-user. Whenever I start the system, I am not able to login utilizing any of the user id's. I have tried serveral things including resetting the passwords using nicl command but that didn't help. I have also deleted the appleSetupDone file and went through the setup process, but again, withouth success.
I am guessing my problem has nothing to do with passwords and everything to do with multi-user permissions to certain system files/folders. I can't recall, but this issue maybe prompted by unchecking the multi-user access in the WorkGroup managment console.
I would apreciate any help on this matter as currently my system is down. This is a standalone server running Mac OS Server 10.4.8.
Nawaf
Mini 1MB Mac OS X (10.4.8) Server Edition

Roger:
Thanks, that sure helped!
I first had to manage my services from the "single-user" command line--fsck -fy, mount -uw /, sh /etc/rc, and serveradmin--to allow remote access through WGM. Only then I was able to reset the access rights to users, and thus, regained local control of my server.
Regards,
Nawaf

U410 Windows 10 multi user hibernation problem

Hi, I ran into a problem with my U410 after installing Windows 10 (x64) on it.I have a multi user setup, (sometimes there are multiple users logged in to the OS) and one of the users tries to hibernate the system by closing the lid.The problem is, that is this case the system cannot go to hibernated mode and after opening the lid and logging in the user seems to have been logged out. Also the nvidia graphic adapter dissapears sometimes.If only one user is logged in, the hibernation works as expected. The setup is: Windows 10 Enterprise x64 (UEFI), Intel i5, 8GB DD3 (dual channel), 32GB samsung mSATA, 256GB Samsung EVO 850, Nvidia Optimus enabled, with latest drivers (chipset: 10.1.2, raid: 14.5.2) Any help apprisiated! Regards,Richárd

edit: sorry guys, n/m..it wasn't a JRE issue after all :)

Several users on a single file issue: Hosting a multi user Quickbooks file on the WD EX4

Hello everyone. This is going to sound like a super specific third party support issue - but there are some universal things going on here that may help others regarding multiple users of individual files on the EX4. My company houses client and billing files on the EX4. It's all been well and good until we recently allowed multi-user access to our Quickbooks company file. Of course the goal is to have multiple employees working on the file at the same time from different computers. We purchased licenses for each - everything is on the up and up. Whereas I could access the company file on the EX4 with no problems on my computer as a single user, now as soon as I turn on multiuser mode in QB to allow others to access the file on the EX4, the file becomes inaccessible. What do you guys think is happening where one user access to a file on the EX4 is fine, but multiuser access causes the file to be inaccessible? How do you fix it? Other thoughts, there doesn't seem to be a limitation on the EX4 relating to multiple people accessing the same file - streaming the same song for example. So why would a billing database file be any different? Especially when the licenses and program allow that access. Here's more info, if I host the file on my desktop computer everyone can access it in multiuser mode over the network. The limitation is the WD EX4. What do you think is going on? (I'd appreciate any insight as I am talking to both tech support teams, QB and WD, this week.)

Thank you so much for your reply. The error shows up when one switches to multi-user mode. It states: Error H101, H202, H303, or H505: when opening your company file When you open a company file in multi-user mode, you see an error:You're trying to work with a company file located on another computer, and this copy of QuickBooks can't reach the server on that computer (H202).You're trying to work with a company file located on another computer, and that computer needs additional installation and setup. (H101, H303, and H505).It appears that the QuickBooks software on computer [server name] is set up to allow shared connections to the company file, but the QuickBooks software on your computer is unable to communicate with it. (H202).Most often it's an H202 error which suggests that the program can't reach the server on that computer (NAS location). Why would the NAS location become invisible / unreachable once multi-user mode is on? I really appreciate your expert brainstorm and ideas.

DIS Install fails to find notes.ini if multi-user notes install

Yesterday I attempted to install the WebCenter Integration into a Citrix image and it fails with the error 'Error 2343: Specified path is empty'. After some experimenting on a physical machine I have been able to confirm the installer program fails if the Lotus Notes client has been installed with the multi-user option (what we require) but succeeds if it installed as single user. With Lotus if it's installed as single user the data directory will be in the program install directory, if it's multi-user then it's in the user's profile. . Looking at the installer log you can see it can't locate the notes.ini file when it's a multi-user install.

Install Notes as single user then switch to multi-user, there is a section in the guide here http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E28280_01/doc.1111/e10624/setup.htm#DISUS147 that tells you how to manually edit the Notes.ini file

Z4: Word and OneDrive don't work with Multi-User

Hi,We are sharing the Z4 tablet among 4 in my family. For this I'm using the Android multiple users.The pre-installed MS Word worked for the main user or owner perfectly. Then I tried to install it for the second and third and fourth user. In all cases after starting Word for these users the message came up "download of additional content required". When clicking on "download" the app crashes. Then recently an update of Word was delivered via Google Play. Now the same happens for the main user. Deinstalling for all four users and reinstalling from Google Play didn't solve the issue.For MS OneDrive the issue is: it works for the main user. For the other users the Playstore gives the error message: "another user on this devices installed an incompatible version of OneDrive. Deinstall this first". Deinstalling and reinstalling didn't helped that issue either. Only one of the four users can use OneDrive. Any ideas on how to solve this? I do have the BKB50 and Word was my main reason to go for that combination with the Z4.Regards,Zampano

Microsoft Office for Android email support replied only with a standardized email. Beside of pointing to some FAQ it just offers to call the support hotline. I'll have to wait for the office hours then. In the meantime: has anyone tried using Word in a Multi-User setup on the Z4? Maybe it's just an issue here at me...Thx and Best Regards Zampano

Does the NI-DAQ DLL support multi user usage?

I am currently developping several applications that will acces the card at the same time. Is it possible and does the DLL s have support for multi users.

The answer is yes and no. If the different programs are accessing different functionality (ie, AI, AO, CTR), then yes. If they are both trying to access AI lines for example, even if they are different AI lines, then no. If you have a specific setup you are curious about, post here again.

Multi-user multi-head setup

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for