Hi Mark,
In the patch that you provided to freebsd-net,
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2013-February/034695.html, I
have a question.
nd6_timer() acquires the write lock using ND_DEFRTR_WLOCK. However,
defrouter_select again tries to acquire a read lock using ND_DEFRTR_RLOCK.
Th
Old Synopsis: re0 flapping up/down
New Synopsis: [re] re0 flapping up/down
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Mar 13 05:30:13 UTC 2013
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer(s).
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/quer
<
said:
> Basically, this patch:
> - allows setting of the tcp timeout via vfs.nfsd.tcpcachetimeo
> (I'd suggest you go down to a few minutes instead of 12hrs)
> - allows TCP caching to be disabled by setting vfs.nfsd.cachetcp=0
> - does the above 2 things you describe to try and avoid the live
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > To be honest, I'd consider seeing a lot of non-empty receive queues
> > for TCP connections to the NFS server to be an indication that it is
> > near/at its load limit. (Sure, if you do netstat a lot, you will
> > occasionally
> > see a non-empty queue here
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 05:15:48PM +0900, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:14:03PM +0600, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On 07.03.2013 12:23, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:08:50AM +0600, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
> > >> It was definitely older
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
> YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:09:28PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >>I can provide you full access to this machine (if you want) or let me
> >>know, what version I should check. Older version
On 12 Mar 2013, at 23:50, Schrodinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a problem reaching my ipv6 default router.
>
> # ping6 -c 1 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2001:41d0:2:e7c4::1 --> 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> ping6: sendmsg: Operation not permitted
> ping6: wrote 2001:41d
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:42 PM, M. Schulte wrote:
> Hi!
>
> [First of all, I have posted this question already on the FreeBSD
> forum -- so far without replies -- and now my hope is that the set of
> subscribers here and those of the forum do not completely coincide.]
>
> I have installed FreeBS
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Boris Kochergin wrote:
> Additionally, can someone clarify the meaning of "total" vs. "max" for
> these values?
>
> -Boris
>
It measures the amount of memory being used as that type of data
structure. This is the total of the number of allocated items (current)
> On 12 Mar 2013, at 21:06, "Vladislav Prodan" wrote:
>
> > lo0: flags=8049 metric 0 mtu 16384
> >options=3
> >inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00
> >inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
> >inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x9
> >inet6 2001:67c:21f0:f::1 prefixle
Hi,
I have a problem reaching my ipv6 default router.
# ping6 -c 1 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2001:41d0:2:e7c4::1 --> 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
ping6: sendmsg: Operation not permitted
ping6: wrote 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 16 chars, ret=-1
--- 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:f
On 12 Mar 2013, at 21:06, "Vladislav Prodan" wrote:
>
> I have a FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE amd64.
>
> Network:
> vlan300: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
>description: Uplink_1
>inet
>inet6
>
> vlan400: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
>description: Uplink_2
>inet
>inet6
On 12 Mar 2013, at 22:42, "M. Schulte" wrote:
> Hi!
>
> [First of all, I have posted this question already on the FreeBSD
> forum -- so far without replies -- and now my hope is that the set of
> subscribers here and those of the forum do not completely coincide.]
>
> I have installed FreeBSD
Hi!
[First of all, I have posted this question already on the FreeBSD
forum -- so far without replies -- and now my hope is that the set of
subscribers here and those of the forum do not completely coincide.]
I have installed FreeBSD 9.1 on my server (it's a virtualized qemu/kvm
environment, in
Additionally, can someone clarify the meaning of "total" vs. "max" for
these values?
-Boris
On 03/12/13 17:23, Paul A. Procacci wrote:
>> How can I increase "mbufs," as they appear above, and "mbuf clusters,"
>> as they appear above?
> You can modify the sysctl's associated with mbufs to suit you
> How can I increase "mbufs," as they appear above, and "mbuf clusters,"
> as they appear above?
You can modify the sysctl's associated with mbufs to suit your needs.
https://wiki.freebsd.org/NetworkPerformanceTuning
The following link describes what mbufs are and sysctl's governing
their operat
Hi.
I have a FreeBSD 9.1/amd64 machine. It runs HAProxy and runs out of
various things frequently. Sometimes it's mbufs.
netstat -m:
68202/1698/69900 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
41449/1229/42678/2622144 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
41449/1175 mbuf+clusters out of packet
I have a FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE amd64.
Network:
vlan300: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
description: Uplink_1
inet
inet6
vlan400: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
description: Uplink_2
inet
inet6
vlan100: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
descripti
The following reply was made to PR kern/176446; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Charbon, Julien"
To: Cc: bug-follo...@freebsd.org,
"De La Gueronniere, Marc"
Subject: Re: kern/176446: [netinet] [patch] Concurrency in ixgbe driving
out-of-order
packet process and spurious RST
Date: Tu
19 matches
Mail list logo
