Wednesday 29 of October 2008 14:34:05 Alexander Motin napisał(a):
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> > So now i am lost again. If packet filtering on bge card is counted to
> > irq17: bge0 process so i think it should use more cpu.
> > From what you wrote there should be no differenc
Wednesday 29 of October 2008 11:36:45 Alexander Motin napisał(a):
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> > Tuesday 28 of October 2008 19:10:43 Alexander Motin napisał(a):
> >> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> >>>> The CPU time you see there includes much more then just a card
> >&g
Tuesday 28 of October 2008 19:10:43 Alexander Motin napisał(a):
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> >> The CPU time you see there includes much more then just a card
> >> handling itself. It also includes CPU time of the most parts of
> >> network stack used to process received p
On Tuesday 28 of October 2008 15:12:09 Alexander Motin wrote:
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> > On other router based on the same hardware and software i have something
> > like that:
> >
> >10 root 1 171 ki31 0K 8K RUN1 235.4H 78.66% idle:
> > cpu
Tuesday 28 of October 2008 12:29:54 Ivan Voras napisał(a):
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> > Tuesday 28 of October 2008 11:49:21 Oleksandr Samoylyk napisał(a):
> >> Ivan Voras wrote:
> >>> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> >>>> Another question is why em0 taskq is eating s
Tuesday 28 of October 2008 11:43:40 Oleksandr Samoylyk napisał(a):
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > i have two core system with freebsd 7.0. I have two NIC; first is em
> > and second is bge.
> > I wonder why system put irq processes almost always
Tuesday 28 of October 2008 11:49:21 Oleksandr Samoylyk napisał(a):
> Ivan Voras wrote:
> > Bartosz Giza wrote:
> >> Another question is why em0 taskq is eating so much cpu ? BGE
> >> interface is actually one that pushes 2 times more packets than em0
> >> and
Hi,
i have two core system with freebsd 7.0. I have two NIC; first is em and
second is bge.
I wonder why system put irq processes almost always to one core.
There is example:
11 root1 171 ki31 0K 8K RUN0 311.2H 96.19% idle: cpu0
10 root 1 171 ki31 0K 8K CPU
Hi,
i am looking for a good NIC from NIC to put on our quite busy router based
on freebsd 6.3 (soon 7.x)
I've found server NIC from intel and there is such a thing like scalable I/O
on windows and linux.
(from web page)
"load balancing on multiple CPUs Increases
performance on multi-processor s
Tuesday 25 of March 2008 20:42:24 [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a):
> Synopsis: [ppp] ppp can not set the correct interface with pptpd
>
> Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
> Responsible-Changed-By: remko
> Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Mar 25 19:42:10 UTC 2008
> Responsible-Change
Friday 29 of February 2008 17:28:07 napisałeś(-łaś):
> Am Fr, 29.02.2008, 16:35, schrieb Bartosz Giza:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have to do such a thing like redirecting connections to port 80 based
> > on probability. For example i need to redirect 10% requests to my web
>
Hi,
I have to do such a thing like redirecting connections to port 80 based on
probability. For example i need to redirect 10% requests to my web server and
other 90% of requests should go to the original location.
I know that pf has probability feature but there is no probability option for
r
n 6.2-STABLE FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE #2: Wed Jan 31 19:16:11 CET 2007
amd64
Any help or advice wanted :)
--
Pozdrawiam,
Bartosz Giza
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
13 matches
Mail list logo
