--- On Wed, 2012/1/18, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2012 10:27:13 pm aconnoll...@yahoo.co.jp wrote:
> Please try this patch:
>
> Index: sys/dev/atkbdc/atkbdc_isa.c
> ===
> --- atkbdc_isa.c(revision 230009)
> +++
O. Hartmann wrote:
> Hello.
> I still use the amd automounter, but I miss NFSv4 capabilities. Since
> Linux seems to use a more deep in the kernel located facility, I'd
> like
> to ask whether FreeBSd has an alternative to the amd automounter with
> NFSv4 capabilities. Sorry if I bother someone, I'
On 21/01/2012, at 7:14, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> In addition to supporting WarpDrive, the driver also supports Integrated
> RAID.
>
> Thanks to LSI for doing the work on this driver!
This is great news (the RAID support) - thanks very much.
Is there a corresponding userland tool, or plans for
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 23:14:20 -, Steven Hartland wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Kenneth D. Merry"
> To: ;
> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 8:44 PM
> Subject: LSI supported mps(4) driver available
>
>
> >
> >The LSI-supported version of the mps(4) driver that supports the
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth D. Merry"
To: ;
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 8:44 PM
Subject: LSI supported mps(4) driver available
The LSI-supported version of the mps(4) driver that supports their 6Gb SAS
HBAs as well as WarpDrive controllers, is available here:
http://peop
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:53:04 -0800, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> > The LSI-supported version of the mps(4) driver that supports their 6Gb SAS
> > HBAs as well as WarpDrive controllers, is available here:
>
> Just to clarify, this will repla
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> The LSI-supported version of the mps(4) driver that supports their 6Gb SAS
> HBAs as well as WarpDrive controllers, is available here:
Just to clarify, this will replace the existing mps(4) driver in
FreeBSD 10-CURRENT and 9-STABLE?
So
The LSI-supported version of the mps(4) driver that supports their 6Gb SAS
HBAs as well as WarpDrive controllers, is available here:
http://people.freebsd.org/~ken/lsi/mps_lsi.20120120.1.txt
I plan to check it in to head next week, and then MFC it into stable/9 a
week after that most likely.
Pl
Hello.
I still use the amd automounter, but I miss NFSv4 capabilities. Since
Linux seems to use a more deep in the kernel located facility, I'd like
to ask whether FreeBSd has an alternative to the amd automounter with
NFSv4 capabilities. Sorry if I bother someone, I'm not aware of an
alternative a
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 11:39:42 am Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently noticed that multimedia/vlc generates a lot of disk IO when
> playing media files. For instance, when playing a 320kbps mp3 gstat
> reports about 1250kBps (=1kbps). That's quite a lot of overhead.
>
> It turn
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Joel Dahl wrote:
> On 20-01-2012 7:57, Warren Block wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, Warren Block wrote:
>>
>> > The patch in PR 160818 makes some clarifications and improvements to the
>> > new
>> > boot menu. Obviously this is not for 9.0-RELEASE, just wanting
On 20-01-2012 7:57, Warren Block wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, Warren Block wrote:
>
> > The patch in PR 160818 makes some clarifications and improvements to the
> > new
> > boot menu. Obviously this is not for 9.0-RELEASE, just wanting to get it
> > out
> > there so people can look at it.
>
> First step in debugging is to find out if the problem is SU+J
> specific. To find out, turn off SU+J but leave SU. This change
> is done by running:
>
> umount
> tunefs -j disable
> mount
> cd
> rm .sujournal
Success! Th
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 03:02:42PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
T> New panic has been introduced somewhere between
T> r229851 and r229932, that happens on shutdown if
T> kernel has WITNESS and doesn't have WITNESS_SKIPSPIN.
I've run through binary search and panic was introduced
by r229854.
--
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, Warren Block wrote:
The patch in PR 160818 makes some clarifications and improvements to the new
boot menu. Obviously this is not for 9.0-RELEASE, just wanting to get it out
there so people can look at it.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=160818
Among other th
On Jan 20, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 01/20/12 15:27, Nikolay Denev wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 20, 2012, at 2:31 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/20/12 14:13, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 01/20/12 13:08, Nikolay Denev
On 01/20/12 15:27, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On Jan 20, 2012, at 2:31 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 01/20/12 14:13, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 01/20/12 13:08, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On 20.01.2012, at 12:51, Alexander Motinwrote:
On 01/20/12 10
On Jan 20, 2012, at 2:31 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 01/20/12 14:13, Nikolay Denev wrote:
>> On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
>>> On 01/20/12 13:08, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On 20.01.2012, at 12:51, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 01/20/12 10:09, Nikolay Denev wrot
On 01/20/12 14:13, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 01/20/12 13:08, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On 20.01.2012, at 12:51, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 01/20/12 10:09, Nikolay Denev wrote:
Another thing I've observed is that active/active probably only makes
On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 01/20/12 13:08, Nikolay Denev wrote:
>> On 20.01.2012, at 12:51, Alexander Motin wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/20/12 10:09, Nikolay Denev wrote:
Another thing I've observed is that active/active probably only makes
sense if you are acces
On 01/20/12 13:08, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On 20.01.2012, at 12:51, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 01/20/12 10:09, Nikolay Denev wrote:
Another thing I've observed is that active/active probably only makes sense if
you are accessing single LUN.
In my tests where I have 24 LUNS that form 4 vdevs in a
On 20.01.2012, at 12:51, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 01/20/12 10:09, Nikolay Denev wrote:
>> Another thing I've observed is that active/active probably only makes sense
>> if you are accessing single LUN.
>> In my tests where I have 24 LUNS that form 4 vdevs in a single zpool, the
>> highest pe
On 01/20/12 10:09, Nikolay Denev wrote:
Another thing I've observed is that active/active probably only makes sense if
you are accessing single LUN.
In my tests where I have 24 LUNS that form 4 vdevs in a single zpool, the
highest performance was achieved
when I split the active paths among the
On Nov 14, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Gary Palmer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 10:24:06PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
>> On 01.11.2011 19:50, Dennis K?gel wrote:
>>> Not sure if replying on-list or off-list makes more sense...
>>
>> Replying on-list could share experience to other users.
>>
>>> A
24 matches
Mail list logo
