Kris Kennaway disse na ultima mensagem:
>>
>> But also I checked the ULE/BSD against my particular problem and there
>> is
>> no difference at all. I get no acceptable disk read performance when
>> comparing what I had with 4.11, wether with ULE or with 4BSD
>
> Be very careful, because I've perso
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 05:23:39PM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
> >> kernel config
> >> http://suporte.lucenet.com.br/ms/kernel62
> >
> > optionsSCHED_ULE # ULE scheduler
> >
> > From the NOTES file from where you copied this:
> >
> > # SCHED_ULE is a new scheduler that has be
Kris Kennaway disse na ultima mensagem:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:58:06PM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
>
>> I have two server, the main server is a Supermicro Dualcore Dual Opteron
>> and the backup is a Athlon64 X2, both with 4GB
>>
>> The disks are the same, only the onboard SCSI is Adaptec an
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:58:06PM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
> I have two server, the main server is a Supermicro Dualcore Dual Opteron
> and the backup is a Athlon64 X2, both with 4GB
>
> The disks are the same, only the onboard SCSI is Adaptec and the other is
> LSI. Funny is that I have no d
Kris Kennaway disse na ultima mensagem:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
>>
>> Kris Kennaway disse na ultima mensagem:
>> > On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:53:47AM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
>> >
>> >> I forgot to say that I tried it already. Even if it gave me no
>> >>
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
>
> Kris Kennaway disse na ultima mensagem:
> > On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:53:47AM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
> >
> >> I forgot to say that I tried it already. Even if it gave me no
> >> improvement
> >> I have it in 16 at this time t
Kris Kennaway disse na ultima mensagem:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:53:47AM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
>
>> I forgot to say that I tried it already. Even if it gave me no
>> improvement
>> I have it in 16 at this time together with a higher
>> vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem
>> value.
>>
>> Sincerley, an
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:53:47AM -0200, Michel Santos wrote:
> I forgot to say that I tried it already. Even if it gave me no improvement
> I have it in 16 at this time together with a higher vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem
> value.
>
> Sincerley, any of the configuration changes I did gave me absolutel
Mark Kirkwood disse na ultima mensagem:
> Michel Santos wrote:
>> I hope somebody can help me. I upgraded recently my cache server (squid)
>> 4.11 to 6.2
>>
>> I notice that my disk read performance seems to be low. I observe it by
>> reading diskio from net-snmp. I started to check this because m
Michel Santos wrote:
I hope somebody can help me. I upgraded recently my cache server (squid)
4.11 to 6.2
I notice that my disk read performance seems to be low. I observe it by
reading diskio from net-snmp. I started to check this because my old
server gave much better results from cache.
I se
I hope somebody can help me. I upgraded recently my cache server (squid)
4.11 to 6.2
I notice that my disk read performance seems to be low. I observe it by
reading diskio from net-snmp. I started to check this because my old
server gave much better results from cache.
I see read access as 1/4 -
11 matches
Mail list logo
