This is the first time I've used freebsd-update in years, and I'm
immediately flagging it as something I won't use in the future. For
the last half hour it has been forcing me to manually resolve, one by
one, in an editor, hundreds of "merge conflicts" such as these:
1 <<< current version
On 20/09/2013 15:08, Guy Helmer wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2013, at 11:25 AM, Guy Helmer wrote:
>
>> Normally I build VMware ESXi servers with enterprise-class WD SATA drives
>> and I/O performance in FreeBSD VMs on the servers is fine.
>> Whenever I build a VMware ESXi server with a RAID controller, I
On 17/09/2013 17:01, Patrick Dung wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
> I have posted the question in freebsd-questions but have not get feedback, so
> I tried to asked in here.
>
> 1.
> Transparent Superpages was in FreeBSD for a few years.
> I would like to know if there is any benchmark or real world
On 13/09/2013 23:29, Sean Bruno wrote:
> How does one make geom_concat(4) load at boot, assume two devices are to
> be used as a single concatenated device and then create
> the /dev/ device for it?
>
> My MIPS kernconf has:
>
> # GEOM modules
> device geom_map# to get access to
On 28 August 2013 18:12, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> So, if I understand this correctly, a normal desktop user won't
> notice any real change, except that buildworld might get faster,
> and big servers will benefit?
Basically, yes, but read on...
> But could this negatively impact small, embedded s
On 23/08/2013 15:23, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am using FreeBSD-9-STABLE on the following hardware:
>
> FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 24 CPUs
> FreeBSD/SMP: 2 package(s) x 6 core(s) x 2 SMT threads
>
> So I have 2 physical CPUs with 6 core each.
>
> # cpuset -g
> pi
On 24/05/2013 18:57, Welcome, Traiano wrote:
> You appear not to realize that to even begin working with one of the existing
> projects, you'd best have a solid understanding of OSes to begin with,
> which brings up an interesting catch -22 that goes something like:
>
> "You can't join the clu
During the BSDCan & DevSummit I got interested in finding out why
blogbench is so slow on FreeBSD. After talking to jhb, it looked like
one of the reasons might be that opening files with O_RDWR or O_WRONLY
(anything opening the file for writing) is serialized.
To check this, I've written a small
On 04/03/2013 21:50, Nick Evans wrote:
> iostat (slow case):
>
>tty mfid0mfid1 cd0 cpu
> tin tout KB/t tps MB/s KB/t tps MB/s KB/t tps MB/s us ni sy in id
>0 479 0.00 0 0.00 80.00 2 0.16 0.00 0 0.00 11 0 1 0
On 12/12/2012 17:57, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> The performance of the iSCSI disk is
> about the same as the local disk for some operations --- faster for
> some, slower for others. The workstation has 12G of memory and it's
> my perception that iSCSI is heavily cached and that this enhances it's
On 25/11/2012 19:27, trafdev wrote:
> Hi. Can you please point me to some discussions and solutions related to
> this problem? Thanks.
Since this is a developers-mostly mailing list, I think you could get a
better response at the freebsd-secur...@freebsd.org list.
signature.asc
Description: Op
On 19/11/2012 13:47, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>>> (and is GPL btw)
>>
>> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
>> proper crypto signin
On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:
> (and is GPL btw)
Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
proper crypto signing using GPG:
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F
signature.asc
Description: Ope
On 13/11/2012 04:07, Eitan Adler wrote:
> What do people think of this? Maybe /usr/libexec/locate.updatedb is a
> better pointer?
... or, make it automagical by adding a rc.d script which will test the
database exists (or is "too small") and start locate.updatedb as a
background / detached process
On 30/10/2012 15:47, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 13:46 +0100, Fabian Keil wrote:
>> Karl Pielorz wrote:
>>
>>> Can anyone think of any quick pointers as to why some code originally
>>> written under 6.4 amd64 - when re-compiled under 9.0-stable amd64 takes
>>> up a *lot* more memory
On 20 October 2012 14:45, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Ivan Voras wrote:
>> I don't know how to interpret the rise in context switches; as this is
>> kernel code, I'd expect no context switches. I hope someone else can
>> explain.
>>
> Don't the mtx_lock() c
On 20 October 2012 13:42, Nikolay Denev wrote:
> Here are the results from testing both patches :
> http://home.totalterror.net/freebsd/nfstest/results.html
> Both tests ran for about 14 hours ( a bit too much, but I wanted to compare
> different zfs recordsize settings ),
> and were done first
On 15 October 2012 22:58, Rick Macklem wrote:
> The problem is that UDP entries very seldom time out (unless the
> NFS server isn't seeing hardly any load) and are mostly trimmed
> because the size exceeds the highwater mark.
>
> With your code, it will clear out all of the entries in the first
>
On 15 October 2012 16:31, Nikolay Denev wrote:
>
> On Oct 15, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> http://people.freebsd.org/~ivoras/diffs/nfscache_lock.patch
>>
>> It should apply to HEAD without Rick's patches.
>>
>> It's a bit different appro
On 13/10/2012 17:22, Nikolay Denev wrote:
> drc3.patch applied and build cleanly and shows nice improvement!
>
> I've done a quick benchmark using iozone over the NFS mount from the Linux
> host.
>
Hi,
If you are already testing, could you please also test this patch:
http://people.freebsd.o
Hello,
Since I have less free time than necessary to properly maintain the
"What's cooking" page(s), I've transitioned the one for FreeBSD 10, and
hopefully future versions, to the FreeBSD wiki:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD10
This reduces the "bus factor" for this page and also allow
On 14/09/2012 09:49, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> Hello hackers,
>
> I'm looking through the Clang Analyzer scans on
> http://scan.freebsd.your.org/freebsd-head looking for false positives to
> report back to LLVM. There are quite a list of reports suggesting to change
> vfork() calls to posix_spa
On 19/07/2012 20:27, Richard Yao wrote:
> Dear Everyone,
>
> FreeBSD 9 has awful block IO performance in KVM. I have experienced it
> and others have experienced it. Someone posted slides to slideshare with
> benchmarks documenting it:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/TakeshiHasegawa1/runningfreebsd
On 07/06/2012 01:26, Florian Smeets wrote:
> On 05.06.12 16:29, Mark Felder wrote:
>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 06:49:18 -0500, Florian Smeets wrote:
>>
>>> As far as i understand it does at least enable usage of pages up to 4MB,
>>> perhaps someone should teach mysql about the FreeBSD's limits?
>>> If
On 2 June 2012 12:29, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>>>
>>
>> In my words i would say "It enables mysql to use super-pages/large-pages".
>
> i asked the question wrong. the right should be "how does it do". Because i
> am not aware about any user level interface in FreeBSD to explicitly request
> superpa
On 01/06/2012 10:19, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> what tool and how can be used to display detailed map what exactly wired
> memory on my system as it is far way too much (1.5GB out of 4GB RAM).
Do you use ZFS?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 1 June 2012 14:35, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> http://people.freebsd.org/~ivoras/stuff/spsurvey.py
>>
>> The results from three systems (with the script being run as root) are
>> here:
>>
>> http://people.freebsd.org/~ivoras/stuff/spsurvey_desktop.txt
>> http://people.freebsd.org/~ivoras/stuff/sp
hello,
I was wondering how much usage superpages get in real-world systems, and
made a small script to parse the output of "procstat -va":
http://people.freebsd.org/~ivoras/stuff/spsurvey.py
The results from three systems (with the script being run as root) are here:
http://people.freebsd.org/~
On 8 April 2012 15:41, wrote:
> ioctl(FIONREAD)
Yes, this is what I was looking for, thanks!
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubs
On 7 April 2012 23:36, Vlad Galu wrote:
> This might not exactly be what you want, but struct kevent has a member
> called "data" which, for sockets and pipes, returns the number of available
> bytes to read (or write) for EVFILT_READ (or EVFILT_WRITE) events.
>
That's a good idea but I'm actua
Hi,
I'm tracking down an obscure bug in my userland program and it might
have something to do with the way I write&read data through a (Unix
domain) socket. I'm setting SO_SNDBUF and SO_RCVBUF, and what I'm
looking for is some way to query the amount of TX & RX buffered / free
data on a socket. Is
>> On 02/22/2012 01:42, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> > The Dragonfly team has recently liberated their VM from the giant lock
>> > and there are some interesting benchmarks comparing it to FreeBSD 9 and a
>> > derivative of RedHat Enterprise Linux:
> I just sa
This is mostly idle wanderings than anything useful, but I've just
redirected an application which creates a lot of temporary data to a
tmpfs mount point and I'm happily observing disk bandwidth dwindling
from a sustained many dozens of MB/s to merely hundreds of KB/s, which
is the value the system
The Dragonfly team has recently liberated their VM from the giant lock and
there are some interesting benchmarks comparing it to FreeBSD 9 and a
derivative of RedHat Enterprise Linux:
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2011-11/msg8.html
Other developments are described in their
The Dragonfly team has recently liberated their VM from the giant lock and
there are some interesting benchmarks comparing it to FreeBSD 9 and a
derivative of RedHat Enterprise Linux:
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2011-11/msg8.html
Other developments are described in their
On 20/02/2012 01:14, Oliver Pinter wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> What is geom_aes (sys/geom/geom_aes.*) (wherein differs form geli,
> besides useses fewer geom layer and has a compiled in key), and who
> can I find something from this geom module/layer?
>
> How can I use this geom layer? Only added optio
On 13/02/2012 15:48, Stephen Sanders wrote:
> We've an application that logs data on one very large raid6 array
> and updates/accesses a database on another smaller raid5 array.
You would be better off with RAID10 for a database (or anything which
does random IO).
> Both arrays are connected to t
On 06/02/2012 20:10, Alexander Best wrote:
btw: does anybody know, if there are plans to commit the BFS scheduler to HEAD
BFS is available but I think it needs more work on it before it can be
useful; it didn't explore some optimizations it could have and currently
spends much more time in l
On 5 February 2012 11:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>
> 'make MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER=1' is the workground used right now..
David Xu suggested that it is a bug in Python - it doesn't set
process-shared attribute when it calls sem_init(), but i've tried
patching it (replacing the port patchfile file the
On 17 January 2012 14:49, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
> On 17 January 2012 13:44, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 17/01/2012 07:32, Atom Smasher wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012, richo wrote:
>>>
>>>> This would be a different argument if all the devs were pa
On 17/01/2012 07:32, Atom Smasher wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2012, richo wrote:
This would be a different argument if all the devs were paid a salary.
==
what percentage of linux devs are on salary to develop linux?
Apparently, 3/4: http://apcmag.com/linux-now-75-corporate.htm
On 17 January 2012 13:02, Tom Evans wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> I've concluded very early that because of what I've said above, the only way
>> to run FreeBSD effectively is to track -STABLE. The developers MFC-ing stuff
>> usual
On 17/01/2012 07:20, John Kozubik wrote:
as wonderful as ZFS on FreeBSD is (and we are
deploying it this year) it is only now (well, in March) with 8.3 that I
feel it is finally safe and stable enough to bet the farm on. I'm not
the only one that feels this way.
I must remember to ask you abo
(answering out of order)
On 16/01/2012 23:28, John Kozubik wrote:
2) Having two simultaneous production releases draws focus away from
both of them, and keeps any release from ever truly maturing.
This isn't how things work. The -CURRENT always has (and probably always
had and always will ha
On 11 January 2012 17:47, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> when doing interactive builds as well. The issue appears to be
> exacerbated when we have more builds running in parallel on the same
> machine. I've also run into the same issue compiling talloc because it
> uses the same waf infrastructure as td
On 11 January 2012 14:06, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 6:21:18 am Ivan Voras wrote:
>> The lang/python27 port can optionally be built with the support for
>> POSIX semaphores - i.e. sem(4). This option is labeled as experimental
>> so it may be th
The lang/python27 port can optionally be built with the support for
POSIX semaphores - i.e. sem(4). This option is labeled as experimental
so it may be that the code is simply incorrect. I've tried it and get
frequent hangs with the python process in the "usem" state. The kernel
stack is as fol
So, if I understand you correctly, you are reporting a bug in which a
jailed process is holding (the jailed instance of) /dev/null open and
"umount -f" doesn't work on the jailed /dev ?
On 14/11/2011 23:52, Slono Slono wrote:
> On one of servers where installed cacti in jail there is strange enou
I have an "interesting" problem which is why I'm posting to the hackers@
list :)
The situation is: an 8-STABLE amd64 system from a few months ago running
on VMWare ESXi 5, which worked fine until today. Today, it looks like
anything which "sleeps" for whatever reasons (including select(2))
simply
On 21/10/2011 12:57, Razmig K wrote:
> Le 21.10.2011 12:26, Ivan Voras a écrit :
>> Well, do you know that SIZE in top is virtual memory size, not resident
>> size (which is the "RES" column)? You can allocate whatever you want
>> from virtual memory, it is not &quo
On 21/10/2011 12:19, Razmig K wrote:
> Le 21.10.2011 10:44, Peter Jeremy a écrit :
>> On 2011-Oct-20 19:57:31 +0200, Razmig K wrote:
>> It's not clear whether the program is attempting to determine it's
>> own (or a child's) memory footprint, or that of an arbitrary process.
>> In the former case,
On 07/10/2011 19:13, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>> For one thing, this indeed causes more memory use for the OS. This is
>> somewhat mitigated by automatic use of superpages. Superpage promotion
>> still keeps the 4KB page table around, so most saving
On 05/10/2011 09:38, Trond Endrestøl wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2011 12:54+1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
>> On 05/10/2011, at 2:30, Michel Talon wrote:
>>
>>> Des wrote:
Does anyone actually use nscd?
>>>
>>> I am using it since a lot of time. I have not experienced annoying bugs
>>> in all that
On 21 September 2011 16:09, geoffrey levand wrote:
> Sure i can use the synchronization primitives, the problem is that the
> response to a request sent to PS3 VUART port is not
> available immediately, and i have to disallow kernel access to the PS3 VUART
> while i'm waiting for the response in
On 21/09/2011 08:05, geoffrey levand wrote:
> I think you misunderstood what i need. If i got it right then cuse4bsd allows
> user applications to create char devices, right ?
> I do not want to create character devices from user space. My VUART kernel
> module should provide the character device
On 12 September 2011 18:28, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> This was resolved earlier -- you cannot install onto just MBR without a
> bsdlabel. This has never been supported, and worked only by accident before.
> *As it tells you* you need to create sub-partitions.
Hi,
I'll again note that it should
Unfortunately, I continue to have problems with the partitioner part of
the installer in the BETA2 image. See the (unchanged) problem
screenshots here:
http://ivoras.imgur.com/freebsd_installer_2
See also the screenshots of the entire process here (on BETA1):
http://ivoras.imgur.com/installer__p
On 1 September 2011 16:11, Attilio Rao wrote:
>> I mean, if we have 2 cpus in a machine, but MAXCPU is set to 256, there
>> is a bunch of "lost" memory and higher levels of lock contention?
>>
>> I thought that attilio was taking a stab at enhancing this, but at the
>> current time anything more
On 31 August 2011 15:35, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> On 08/31/11 08:28, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> If it is as you say, then the dialog where I entered "/" and "/srv"
>> should definitely NOT have that field on it.
>
> Well, no. It only applies to bsdlabel cont
On 31 August 2011 14:45, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> It does let you set mountpoints, and displays them, and always has, but not
> for bsdlabel container partitions (MBR type "freebsd"), since they aren't
> filesystems. Is this what you were trying to do?
Very probably - it was unclear to me that
On 31/08/2011 02:40, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 08/30/11 19:07, Ivan Voras wrote:
It was a plain install on a RAID volume which appears as ordinary da0
drive. I did do a couple of start-overs so it could be that some state
got lost. It definitely did NOT show mount points in the dialog which
On 31/08/2011 08:42, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 30.08.2011 16:27, Ivan Voras wrote:
Am I doing something wrong or the BETA1 installer cannot be used to
manually create the partition scheme?
1) it doesn't accept "freebsd-swap" as partition type ("invalid argument"
On 29.8.2011. 20:15, John Baldwin wrote:
However, the SRAT code just ignores the table when it encounters an issue like
this, it doesn't hang. Something else later in the boot must have hung.
Anyway... that machine can in its maximal configuration be populated
with eight 10-core CPUs, i.e. 8
On 30.8.2011. 16:11, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 08/30/11 07:27, Ivan Voras wrote:
Am I doing something wrong or the BETA1 installer cannot be used to
manually create the partition scheme?
1) it doesn't accept "freebsd-swap" as partition type ("invalid
argument")
2) it
On 30.8.2011. 16:36, Brandon Falk wrote:
On 8/30/2011 8:27 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
Am I doing something wrong or the BETA1 installer cannot be used to
manually create the partition scheme?
I do not have BETA1 available right now on CD, but I do have BETA2 rev
225251. On this system I'
Am I doing something wrong or the BETA1 installer cannot be used to
manually create the partition scheme?
1) it doesn't accept "freebsd-swap" as partition type ("invalid argument")
2) it doesn't recognize that I have actually created a root (/) mount
point; since it doesn't show mountpoints may
On 29 August 2011 18:33, wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 26/08/2011 19:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> I think that I'll n
On 29 August 2011 17:15, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 29/08/2011 17:46 Ivan Voras said the following:
>> On 26/08/2011 19:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> I think that
On 29 August 2011 17:20, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 29/08/2011 18:18 Ivan Voras said the following:
>>> Not sure if hw.memtest.tests tunable has made it into 9.0-BETA1.
>>> Setting it to zero should result in skipping the checks.
>>
>> If it did, to what should
On 29/08/2011 16:46, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 26/08/2011 19:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> I think that I'll need a 9-CURRENT snapshot on it to run all 128 CPUs,
>>> right?
>>
On 26/08/2011 19:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> I think that I'll need a 9-CURRENT snapshot on it to run all 128 CPUs,
>> right?
>
> A 9.0-BETA1 snapshot, yes.
Well, I'll leave it another
I'll have a 8x8x2 (128 logical CPUs) machine to test for an afternoon
next week and I'm just wondering if any of you have something they want
tested. The opportunities are limited: it would have to be a
self-contained test (no network, drives, etc.) and fairly short.
Of course, I'll do some of
On 23/08/2011 11:59, Aled Morris wrote:
On 23 August 2011 10:52, Ivan Voras wrote:
I agree but there are at least two things going for making the increase
anyway:
1) 2 TB drives cost $80
2) Where the space is really important, the person in charge usually knows
it and can choose a non
On 23/08/2011 03:23, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2011-Aug-22 12:45:08 +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
It would be suboptimal but only for the slight waste of space that would
have otherwise been reclaimed if the block or fragment size remained 512
or 2K. This waste of space is insignificant for the vast
On 19/08/2011 14:21, Aled Morris wrote:
On 19 August 2011 11:15, Tom Evans wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Yuri wrote:
Some latest hard drives have logical sectors of 512 byte when they
actually
have 4k physical sectors.
...
Shouldn't UFS and ZFS drivers be able to either read
On 08/07/2011 05:42, Ilya Bakulin wrote:
Hi hackers,
As a part of ongoing effort to enhance usage of Capsicum in FreeBSD base
system, I want to ask you, which applications in the base system should
receive sandboxing support.
How about a small description what sandboxing can bring to applicatio
On 05/05/2011 15:40, Warren Block wrote:
On Thu, 5 May 2011, Devin Teske wrote:
Running on i386-compatible hardware supporting ACPI:
B&W (standard): http://twitpic.com/4tlsin
Color (loader_color=YES): http://twitpic.com/4tlt6l
Looks nice. Options 3, 4, and 5 could be changed to
3. Safe Mode
On 05/04/2011 15:48, gnehzuil wrote:
Hello,
I would like to apply a new project "HTree Directory Index and Journal
in ext2fs" in GSoC 2011. This project is not in ideas page. But this
project can improve ext2fs in FreeBSD.
Last year, I have participated GSoC 2010 and have implemented a
prealloc
On 24/03/2011 14:11, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
Well, it depends on the decision of core team. AFAIC, to make the KVM
to be committed is very hard, especially for a GSoC project.
Ah, please read what I'm saying: finish, not commit.
But... I think the thread is not talking about the KVM itself...
FU
On 24/03/2011 12:21, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 24/03/2011 10:00, Jing Huang wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am a student of Peking University in China. I am interest
in the FreeBSD project of "Timecounter Performance Improvements".
On 24/03/2011 10:00, Jing Huang wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am a student of Peking University in China. I am interest
in the FreeBSD project of "Timecounter Performance Improvements".
I am familiar with Linux kernel and virtualization systems,
like KVM and Xen. I have maintained t
On 06/03/2011 18:35, Ryan Stone wrote:
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Ryan Stone wrote:
I would try playing with MALLOC_OPTIONS. I seriously doubt that there
is an actual leak in jemalloc, but from my own experiences with it I
suspect that there are certain multithreaded malloc/free sequence
On 23/02/2011 14:03, Dr. Baud wrote:
In general, is it unadvisable to disable super pages?
I don't think there would be any effect on the stability of operation if
you disable superpages, but generally (except in cases of CPU bugs) you
would not need to. Your system should operate a bit
Is it possible to track by some way what kernel system, process or
thread has wired memory? (including "data exists but needs code to
extract it")
I'd like to analyze a system where there is a lot of memory wired but
not accounted for in the output of vmstat -m and vmstat -z. There are no
use
On 7 February 2011 13:38, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>>> I am writing directly to /dev/ad10 but stressing /dev/ad14 (sudo tar -cf
>>> /dev/null /local0)
>>
>> Can you do only one of those things? I.e. leave all the file systems
>> alone and just do something like 'diskinfo -vt /dev/ad14'?
>
> OK, I
On 07/02/2011 04:12, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 07/02/2011, at 13:02, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>>> I'll be looking at it on Monday, I will let you know :)
>>>
>>> No luck with mlock() so it wouldn't appear to be paging is the issue :(
>>
&
On 7 February 2011 02:41, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 05/02/2011, at 12:43, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>> On 05/02/2011, at 11:09, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>>> It doesn't allocate memory once it's going, everything is preallocated
>>>> before the d
On 5 February 2011 23:11, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
> Yes, it seems so. But all of this locking/threading is a black magick for me
> right now, and i don't feel to be able to study out with this fpm issue by
> myself. So i just sent this last obtained info to php-fpm mailing list. And
> thank yo
On 5 February 2011 21:22, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 5 February 2011 21:03, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
>
>>
>> Can you please tell me more what you mean by ""robust" pthreads mutexes" and
>
> It's just a name for properties of a mutex; actually t
On 5 February 2011 21:03, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
>
> Can you please tell me more what you mean by ""robust" pthreads mutexes" and
It's just a name for properties of a mutex; actually this is
imprecise, what's needed here is process-shared & robust
(fpm_shm_slots.c: FPM uses shared memory).
_
On 5 February 2011 19:43, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
> Hi, Ivan!
>
> Thank you much for response and sorry for late answer. We was able to
> collect some data about the issue to make discussion more objective. See
> below.
>>> Simple php-fpm restart solves the problem, but i need to track it down
On 04/02/2011 12:45, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 04/02/2011, at 21:48, Ivan Voras wrote:
I am wondering if this is a scheduler problem (or I am expecting too much :) in
that it is not running my libusb thread reliably under load. The other
possibility is that it is a USB issue, although
On 04/02/2011 03:56, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
I hooked up a logic analyser and I can see most of the time it's fairly
regularly transferring 16k of data every 2msec.
If I load up the disk by, eg, tar -cf /dev/null /local0 I find it drops out and
I can see gaps in the transfers until eventually
On 28 January 2011 23:37, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
>> * The dtrace output I've send is from around thirty seconds of
>> operation, so around 2000 PHP runs. (PHP in this case is FastCGI, so
>> the processes are persistent instead of constantly respawning). In
>> these 2000 runs there have been around 2
On 28 January 2011 22:18, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
> You could try replacing rwlock with plain mutex to check if there are
> priority propagation issues among readers/writers.
How would that manifest? (i.e. how would it be detectable)
> SX locks should also
> work but would likely to be a considerab
On 28 January 2011 16:25, Dan Nelson wrote:
> My guess would be:
>
> kern/vfs_cache.c:151 static struct rwlock cache_lock;
> kern/vfs_cache.c:152 RW_SYSINIT(vfscache, &cache_lock, "Name Cache");
>
> The CACHE_*LOCK() macros.c in vfs_cache use cache_lock, so you've got lots
> of possible contentio
On 28 January 2011 16:15, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, January 28, 2011 8:46:07 am Ivan Voras wrote:
>> I have this situation on a PHP server:
>>
>> 36623 www 1 76 0 237M 30600K *Name 6 0:14 47.27% php-cgi
>> 36638 www 1 76 0 237M 30
I have this situation on a PHP server:
36623 www 1 760 237M 30600K *Name 6 0:14 47.27% php-cgi
36638 www 1 760 237M 30600K *Name 3 0:14 46.97% php-cgi
36628 www 1 1050 237M 30600K *Name 2 0:14 46.88% php-cgi
36627 www 1 1050 23
On 25 January 2011 11:22, wrote:
> Diane Bruce wrote:
>
>> There certainly would not be a chance of putting
>> mercurial or git into base for example.
>
> Completely apart from licensing, another strike against
> mercurial is that it is written in Python, so it couldn't
> go into base unless Pyt
On 24 January 2011 19:31, Diane Bruce wrote:
> As long as it is not GPL.
Unless there's a missing smiley in that sentence there, it is a tough
requirement. Of the major SCMs, only Subversion is non-GPL-ed (even
CVS is...).
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.o
1 - 100 of 409 matches
Mail list logo
