At 10:34 AM 10/12/2006, Danny Braniss wrote:
> >short version:
> >the point im trying to make, is that the same setup, where I only change
> >the release, is going downhill - with this particular MB.
>
> But its not the same necessarily. Some of the settings are different.
> For example, disable
[I guess I should introduce myself before posting, but I'm a bit
pushed for time.]
Some weeks ago I decided to upgrade to 6.x in an attempt to get rid
of some unrelated problems, and ever since then I've seen fairly bad
flaps on fibre Broadcom interfaces. I notice other people have had
similar pr
> >short version:
> >the point im trying to make, is that the same setup, where I only change
> >the release, is going downhill - with this particular MB.
>
> But its not the same necessarily. Some of the settings are different.
> For example, disable net.inet.tcp.inflight.enable on 6.x if you wa
At 04:38 AM 10/12/2006, Danny Braniss wrote:
short version:
the point im trying to make, is that the same setup, where I only change
the release, is going downhill - with this particular MB.
But its not the same necessarily. Some of the settings are different.
For example, disable net.inet.tc
> Jack Vogel wrote:
> > On 10/11/06, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU)
> >> dual cpu.
> >> running iperf -c (receiving):
> >>
> >> freebsd-4.100.0-10.0 sec936 MBytes785 Mbits/sec
> >> freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.
Jack Vogel wrote:
On 10/11/06, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU)
dual cpu.
running iperf -c (receiving):
freebsd-4.100.0-10.0 sec936 MBytes785 Mbits/sec
freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.0 sec413 MBytes346 Mbits/
> On 10/11/06, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU)
> > dual cpu.
> >
> > running iperf -c (receiving):
> >
> > freebsd-4.100.0-10.0 sec936 MBytes785 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.0 sec413 MBytes34
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:06:17 +0200, in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
> wrote:
>
>
>the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU)
>
>dual cpu.
>
>
>
>running iperf -c (receiving):
>freebsd-4.10 0.0-10.0 sec936 MBytes785 Mbits/sec
>freebsd-5.40.0-10.0 sec41
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 02:02:38 +0300
Alexander Motin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think, that there is not very good hash function now used in ng_netflow
in traffic aggregation. So if
> ip-addr varies from 10.60.0.0 to 10.60.100.255
means than destination address will vary in this range and all ot
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 05:21:09AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> >%%%
> >Index: sys/sys/hash.h
> >===
> >RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/sys/hash.h,v
> >retrieving revision 1.2
> >diff -u -p -r1.
10 matches
Mail list logo