I had the same with apache2..
here is the method what i used:
edit these files:
/usr/src/sys/sys/select.h
/usr/include/sys/select.h
change this:
#define FD_SETSIZE 1024U
to this:
#define FD_SETSIZE 4096U
cd /usr/src && make buildworld && make installworld && reboot
after this i got r
hi!
i have a Marwell (SMC) gigabit ethernet card (sk0) and
have serious problems with performance..
the machine is a pc, amd 2000+ xp, 512mb ram.
tested with iperf (bidirectional test, udp transfer, not stream)
and got 8-15% packet drop when the system was idle.
then tuned the sysctl with these
hange the card to intel or 3com, or what to do?
- Original Message -
From: "Pyun YongHyeon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 1:18 AM
Subject: Re: problem with Marwell gigabit performance
On Tue, Mar 14
i forgot to mention the load is twice, than before and the transfer is speed
is
decreased from 20mbyte/s to 9mbyte/s
- Original Message -
From: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 4:40 PM
Subject: Re: problem with Marwell gigabit perform
t 2.0 again..
would you guys give me an advice what to buy? 3com or intel?
(i heard em(4) driver is not too good..)
thx!
- Original Message -
From: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: problem with
iperf is an authentic benchmark, it says
6945/163914 (4.2%) packet loss, when transfering 200MB data,
the system is 80% idle
- Original Message -
From: "Pyun YongHyeon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX )
- Original Message -
From: "Pertti Kosunen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sten Daniel Sørsdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 7:18 PM
Subject: Re:
hi!
i had the packet drop problem with the marwell yukon gigabitcard:
(system is an amd 2000+xp, 512mb ram, fbsd 6.0-p5)
when the apache ran, with no http, just used to share files and the traffic was
2-2,5MB/S i had 14-17% packet drop on the gigabit interface..
with the sysctl i succesfully pull
i increased hz from 2000 to 5000, now the packet loss is decreased
from 5-6% to 0.6-0,8% !!!
huge improve!
should i increase hz more?
- Original Message -
From: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Chuck Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Saturday, Ma
okay, i will try it in a couple days
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ;
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: packet drop with intel gigabit / marwell gigabit
On Mar 18, 2006,
i changed sk to em.
how could i measure speed or benchmark the network performance?
- Original Message -
From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ;
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: packet drop with
- Original Message -
From: "Bohuslav Plucinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Low network performance after upgrade from FreeBSD 4.8 to 6.0
Hello,
I use the FreeBSD box as the firewall with NAT (ipfw + natd).
When I've upgraded the box f
hi!
my question is when will this chip being supported by 6.x?
or is it supported now and i didn't find the proper driver? :)
thanks
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any m
thank you, i will test it soon!
- Original Message -
From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: Marvell 88E8053 lan controller support
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006, OxY wrote:
hi!
i have a little irregular problem with default route..
here are the details:
have two interfaces with the same ip, em0 connected to another server with
crosslink,
em1 is the public, can be reached from the internet connected to a switch.
em0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
options=b
i
any other solution?
can i solve it with static routing?
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 1:10 AM
Subject: Re: changing default route
On May 15, 2006,
but bridging needs ipfw (or pf) and with heavy traffic
it needs lots of cpu.
- Original Message -
From: "Marcin Jessa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "OxY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: changing default route
On
hi!
i have a problem with mbuf...
when all my free memory is gone ( i have 2gb ram) and
memory allocation looks like this:
Mem: 30M Active, 1607M Inact, 245M Wired, 84M Cache, 214M Buf, 3028K Free
Swap: 695M Total, 695M Free
mbuf starts to deny...
netstat -m show 0 deny till has memory, after th
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Blok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'OxY'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Cc: "'Jin Guojun [VFFS]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2006 1:50 PM
Subject: RE: mbuf denied problem
19 matches
Mail list logo
