Hi,
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:18:57 -0800
"Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote:
> If possibility (c) applies, then I would also like to know if anybody
> has any suggestions for how I might be able to get this problem
> escalated so that (hopefully) it gets dealt with before 9.1-RELEASE
> is finalized.
162
Hi folks,
Our QA group (at xxx) using Samba and smbtorture has been seeing a
lot of cases where accept returns ECONNABORTED because the system load
is high and Samba has a large listen backlog.
Every now and then we get a crash in smbd or in winbindd and winbindd
complains of too many open files
Hi,
If this is a real leak, please file a PR so it doesn't get lost.
*cough* let me rephrase that - so the eager PR beavers can keep
chasing it iup.
But, wow. Nice catch!
Adrian
On 8 December 2012 10:13, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Our QA group (at xxx) using Samba and smbtorture
In message <20121208120658.4d115...@x220.ovitrap.com>,
Erich Dollansky wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:18:57 -0800
>"Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote:
>
>> If possibility (c) applies, then I would also like to know if anybody
>> has any suggestions for how I might be able to get this problem
>
Hi folks,
Our QA group (at xxx) using Samba and smbtorture has been seeing a
lot of cases where accept returns ECONNABORTED because the system load
is high and Samba has a large listen backlog.
Every now and then we get a crash in smbd or in winbindd and winbindd
complains of too many open files
On Sun, 2012-12-09 at 00:50 +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Our QA group (at xxx) using Samba and smbtorture has been seeing a
> > lot of cases where accept returns ECONNABORTED because the system load
> > is high and Samba has a large listen backlog.
> >
> > Every now and then
Ronald writes:
> This probably wouldn't be such a big deal if we were just talking about
> Linux. But FreeBSD has always prided itself on being a serious OS for
> serious people with serious work to do... like major server farms and
> such. In the context of high-end applications on high-end hard
In message <20121209014547.238...@gmx.com>,
"Dieter BSD" wrote:
>But don't brag about high-end hardware. Â But FreeBSD has dropped support
>for even semi-high-end hardware (DEC Alpha). So I'm stuck running it on
>AMD64. Nothing against AMD, they did what they could to try and make a silk
>purse
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:52:34 -0800
"Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote:
"analysis" skipped.
>
> As regards to the Native Command Queuing all I can say is "Crap!"
> I wasn't aware...until now... that FreeBSD did not support that. That
> really is a rather entirely serious issue. But I do think tha
On 8 December 2012 23:04, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:52:34 -0800
> "Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote:
>
> "analysis" skipped.
>
>>
>> As regards to the Native Command Queuing all I can say is "Crap!"
>> I wasn't aware...until now... that FreeBSD did not support that. That
>>
Hi,
Yes. atacam supports NCQ.
The older IDE/ATA code doesn't support NCQ. The CAM ATA code (ie,
atacam) supports it if the drive supports it.
So, the "FreeBSD doesn't do NCQ" point is incorrect.
If you don't believe me - look in sys/cam/ata/ata_da.c, look for ata_ncq_cmd().
Adrian
___
On 8 December 2012 23:19, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes. atacam supports NCQ.
>
> The older IDE/ATA code doesn't support NCQ. The CAM ATA code (ie,
> atacam) supports it if the drive supports it.
>
> So, the "FreeBSD doesn't do NCQ" point is incorrect.
>
> If you don't believe me - look in sys
On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Dieter BSD wrote:
Having a 4KiB misalignment is nothing compared with not having NCQ
support.
...
Speaking of alignment, I still get "partition 1 does not end on a
track boundary" messages. FreeBSD has no clue where the track boundaries
are and neither do I. Disks have used
13 matches
Mail list logo
