Quoting Dag-Erling Smørgrav (from Thu, 08 Apr 2010
16:50:16 +0200):
Alexander Leidinger writes:
I did not suggest to run the same program and get different
interfaces. My suggestion was to have a backend-lib and a frontend.
The backend containing the "business-logic", and the frontend bein
В Fri, 09 Apr 2010 10:57:31 +0400
Alex Keda пишет:
> hi!
> is there any plans to implement such opportunities?
> for large files (we have 60k lines) it's very slow work
>
> srv1# sh -E
> # wc -l /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
> 61073 /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
> # date && for i in `cat /ro
09.04.2010 11:14, Hizel Ildar пишет:
В Fri, 09 Apr 2010 10:57:31 +0400
Alex Keda пишет:
hi!
is there any plans to implement such opportunities?
for large files (we have 60k lines) it's very slow work
srv1# sh -E
# wc -l /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
61073 /root/scripts/db/table.25.tx
On 4/9/10 1:02 AM, Alex Keda wrote:
09.04.2010 11:14, Hizel Ildar пишет:
# wc -l /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
61073 /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
# date&& for i in `cat /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt`; do ipfw table
25 add $i; done&& date
пятница, 9 апреля 2010 г. 10:42:01 (MSD)
пятница, 9 апр
Garrett Cooper writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > Garrett Cooper writes:
> > > Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > > > [restored relevant context which was removed earlier in the thread]
> > > > ...which is exactly what I said - but in the sysinstall case, you may
> > > > want to ask some ad
On 04/09/10 10:06, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/9/10 1:02 AM, Alex Keda wrote:
>> 09.04.2010 11:14, Hizel Ildar пишет:
>
# wc -l /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
61073 /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt
# date&& for i in `cat /root/scripts/db/table.25.txt`; do ipfw table
25 add $i; do
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Garrett Cooper writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
Garrett Cooper writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
[restored relevant context which was removed earlier in the thread]
...which is exactly what I said - but in the sysinstall case, you ma
I've booted from dvd to fixit mode and got the following:
FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE-201002 FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE-201002 #0: Tue Feb 16 21:05:59
UTC 2010 r...@mason.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
ATA channel 0:
Master: ad0 ATA/ATAPI revision 0
Slave: no device present
ATA
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 09:55:27AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 February 2010 7:59:58 pm Brandon Gooch wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 10:40 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 5:04:03 pm Brandon Gooch wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:03 PM, John Baldw
Hello.
I see considerably increased performance when creating over gnop -S 4096
virtual disk. Even when I create zpool over raw disks the performance is very
bad and concurent writes stalls. When using gnop, zfs works VERY fast!
Btw, here is another discussion, may be there is a bug in a mav@ c
on 09/04/2010 14:00 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
> I've booted from dvd to fixit mode and got the following:
>
> FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE-201002 FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE-201002 #0: Tue Feb 16 21:05:59
> UTC 2010 r...@mason.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
>
> ATA channel 0:
> M
> Or the disk doesn't actually report 4096 anywhere anyhow... Have you
> considered
> that? If yes, can you verify using any tools of any OS that the disk reports
> 4K
> in any way?
In the previous discussion we found that the disk reports 512 sector size, but
there are additional ATA comman
Paul Wootton writes:
> But... If this is a fresh install, then you really have not lost
> anything if you making a mistake. If sysinstall / sade is run from a
> running system and a mistake is made then you could loose your data,
> but as you will need to have su-ed up, how does this differ from
>
Andriy Gapon writes:
> P.S. DES's name looks strange in headers :-)
Get a better MUA. MIME quoted-printable has been around for what, 15
years?
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd
on 09/04/2010 14:27 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
>> Or the disk doesn't actually report 4096 anywhere anyhow... Have you
>> considered that? If yes, can you verify using any tools of any OS that the
>> disk reports 4K in any way?
>
> In the previous discussion we found that the disk report
On 09.04.2010, at 15:32, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 09/04/2010 14:27 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
>>> Or the disk doesn't actually report 4096 anywhere anyhow... Have you
>>> considered that? If yes, can you verify using any tools of any OS that the
>>> disk reports 4K in any way?
>>
>> In
on 09/04/2010 14:33 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
> On 09.04.2010, at 15:32, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
>> on 09/04/2010 14:27 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
Or the disk doesn't actually report 4096 anywhere anyhow... Have you
considered that? If yes, can you verify using any tools
on 09/04/2010 14:31 Dag-Erling Smørgrav said the following:
> Andriy Gapon writes:
>> P.S. DES's name looks strange in headers :-)
>
> Get a better MUA. MIME quoted-printable has been around for what, 15
> years?
The advice is misdirected. Right, Dmitry? :-)
--
Andriy Gapon
_
> I saw it, but I want to see what's reported in reality.
Installing Windows 7 now. How can OS installation be so long? :-)
--
Alexey Tarasov
(\__/)
(='.'=)
E[: | | | | :]З
(")_(")
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 09/04/2010 14:00 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
>> I've booted from dvd to fixit mode and got the following:
>> /dev/ad4
>>512 # sectorsize
>>1500301910016 # mediasize in bytes (1.4T)
>>2930277168 # mediasize in sectors
>>0
Alexander Motin wrote:
> Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 09/04/2010 14:00 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
>>> I've booted from dvd to fixit mode and got the following:
>>> /dev/ad4
>>>512 # sectorsize
>>>1500301910016 # mediasize in bytes (1.4T)
>>>2930277168 # mediasize
on 09/04/2010 14:14 Alexey Tarasov said the following:
> Hello.
>
> I see considerably increased performance when creating over gnop -S 4096
> virtual disk. Even when I create zpool over raw disks the performance is very
> bad and concurent writes stalls. When using gnop, zfs works VERY fast!
>
On 2010-04-09 13:00, Alexey Tarasov wrote:
/dev/ad4
512 # sectorsize
1500301910016 # mediasize in bytes (1.4T)
2930277168 # mediasize in sectors
0 # stripesize
0 # stripeoffset
2907021 # Cylinders according to firmware
> No, the problem is that you must use the ada(4) driver instead of ad(4).
> The new physical and logical sector support has only been implemented
> for the newer AHCI-over-CAM stack.
pass0: Raw identify data:
0: 427a 3fff c837 0010 003f
8: 2020 2020 2057 442d 574d
On Friday 09 April 2010 7:01:23 am Guido Falsi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 09:55:27AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 7:59:58 pm Brandon Gooch wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 10:40 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 5:04:03 pm Brandon G
On Friday 09 April 2010 5:23:18 am Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Garrett Cooper writes:
> > Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > > Garrett Cooper writes:
> > > > Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > > > > [restored relevant context which was removed earlier in the thread]
> > > > > ...which is exactly wha
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 08:39:58AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday 09 April 2010 7:01:23 am Guido Falsi wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 09:55:27AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm seeing a very similar (perhaps the same) problem on a server I'm
> > trying to c
In the last episode (Apr 08), Garrett Cooper said:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> > On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:18 PM, krad wrote:
> > [ ... ]
> >>> is that even possible with CDDL?
> >>
> >> im not a lawyer but it wouldn't surprise me
> >
> > I'm not a lawyer either, but I was a
2010/4/9 Dag-Erling Smørgrav :
> Garrett Cooper writes:
>> Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
>> > Garrett Cooper writes:
>> > > Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
>> > > > [restored relevant context which was removed earlier in the thread]
>> > > > ...which is exactly what I said - but in the sysinstall cas
While testing an i5 box with HEAD checked out from this morning,
bringing up the second NIC generated this LOR on the console
em1: link state changed to UP
lock order reversal:
1st 0xc5dc7c10 em1:rx(1) (em1:rx(1)) @
/usr/HEAD/src/sys/modules/em/../../dev/e1000/if_em.c:4089
2nd 0xc0f7e88c udp
Someone else also pointed this out. I'm dubious about its claim.
This happens because there is an RX lock taken in rxeof, its held
thru the call into the stack, it then encounters another lock there
and hence this complaint. I've had the RX hold as it is for a long
while and would rather not have t
09.04.10, 11:20, "Garrett Cooper" :
> Ok. Or maybe since `we're here' sade needs to be populating
> $DESTDIR/etc/fstab, not sysinstall ?
I'm also looking for answer to this question. It seems that all basic operations
with partitions are already implemented. And I think about next steps.
Also
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:09:24PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
> Someone else also pointed this out. I'm dubious about its claim.
I can't reproduce the LOR with latest em(4)(r206429).
> This happens because there is an RX lock taken in rxeof, its held
> thru the call into the stack, it then encounte
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:09:24PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
> > Someone else also pointed this out. I'm dubious about its claim.
>
> I can't reproduce the LOR with latest em(4)(r206429).
>
>
Hmmm, wonder what changed that effected that, oh w
At 04:13 PM 4/9/2010, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:09:24PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
> Someone else also pointed this out. I'm dubious about its claim.
I can't reproduce the LOR with latest em(4)(r206429).
I still get it for some reason
1st 0xc5dc7610 em1:rx(1) (em1:rx(1)
Don't know, but I would just ignore it, I think its a false warning anyway.
Jack
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> At 04:13 PM 4/9/2010, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:09:24PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
>> > Someone else also pointed this out. I'm dubiou
Good news. A post r206419 kernel works as anticipated. Thanks for jumping
on this.
Doug
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Eir Nym wrote:
All is good in BIND in system, except it depends on ports tree with
various options.
I have to do followed algorithm, to enable these options:
1) make and install base system
2) install needed dependencies from ports tree
There is another step here, enable op
sorry for the cross-post..
Last night at the Bay Area FreeBSD Users Group meeting we had
a discussion about ports, and what is good about them and what
is bad about them. This has been a topic of discussion quite a
bit recently and we were looking for a solution that would
allow us to keep the go
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> Alfred Perlstein , Matt at ix systems Kris (Mr PBI), some
> others and I, felt that these ideas seemed to make some sense
> and so I put them here for comment.
>
>
FWIW, when I see these discussions I'm always left wondering what's the ba
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/pc98
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:23 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:23 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:25 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:25 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:34 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 03:50:34 - /usr/bin
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> sorry for the cross-post..
>
> Last night at the Bay Area FreeBSD Users Group meeting we had
> a discussion about ports, and what is good about them and what
> is bad about them. This has been a topic of discussion quite a
> bit recently and
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:56:51 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:56:51 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:56:51 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:57:04 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:57:04 - /usr
TB --- 2010-04-10 05:21:18 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-10 05:21:18 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2010-04-10 05:21:18 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 05:21:37 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 05:21:37 - /usr
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>>
>> Alfred Perlstein , Matt at ix systems Kris (Mr PBI), some
>> others and I, felt that these ideas seemed to make some sense
>> and so I put them here for comment.
>>
>>
> FWIW,
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:41:04 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:41:04 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:41:04 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:41:22 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-10 04:41:22 - /usr/bin/c
48 matches
Mail list logo
