Quoting Miroslav Lachman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Tue, 29 Jan 2008
20:45:30 +0100):
Alan Amesbury wrote:
Alan Amesbury wrote:
[snip]
I'd like to run bsnmpd, but need the UCD-MIB for other performance
monitoring. I could run net-snmp and proxy requests through it to
bsnmpd, but that stri
On Jan 30, 2008 9:57 PM, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 30/01/2008, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Rewrite of the lockmgr primitive, for starters. Then we'll see what
> > remains.
>
> Ok, I know about the lockmgr efforts, and they will surely help some
> loads. I'll try
At 08:24 PM 1/30/2008, Steven Hartland wrote:
The plot thickens This stall is not just related to newfs you have to
have gstat running as well. If I do the newfs without gstat running then
no stall occurs. As soon as Im running gstat while doing the newfs then
everything locks as described.
Niki Denev wrote:
HZ=1000
Time:
239 seconds total
122 seconds of transactions (4 per second)
What do you think?
This is a very low result :) I don't know your machine or the parameters
you used with postmark but even FreeBSD on two striped 7.5 kRPM drives
can achieve ~~ 11
On Jan 31, 2008 10:16 PM, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Niki Denev wrote:
>
> > HZ=1000
> > Time:
> > 239 seconds total
> > 122 seconds of transactions (4 per second)
>
> > What do you think?
>
> This is a very low result :) I don't know your machine or the parameters
> yo
On 31/01/2008, Niki Denev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2008 10:16 PM, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Niki Denev wrote:
> >
> > > HZ=1000
> > > Time:
> > > 239 seconds total
> > > 122 seconds of transactions (4 per second)
> >
> > > What do you think?
> >
> > Th
Alexander Motin wrote:
Hi.
While profiling netgraph operation on UP HEAD router I have found that
huge amount of time it spent on memory allocation/deallocation:
0.14 0.05 132119/545292 ip_forward [12]
0.14 0.05 133127/545292 fxp_add_rfabuf [18]
0.27 0.
Alexander Motin wrote:
Alexander Motin пишет:
While profiling netgraph operation on UP HEAD router I have found that
huge amount of time it spent on memory allocation/deallocation:
I have forgotten to tell that it was mostly GENERIC kernel just built
without INVARIANTS, WITNESS and SMP but wi
Alexander Motin wrote:
Hi.
While profiling netgraph operation on UP HEAD router I have found that
huge amount of time it spent on memory allocation/deallocation:
0.14 0.05 132119/545292 ip_forward [12]
0.14 0.05 133127/545292 fxp_add_rfabuf [18]
0.27 0.
Alexander Motin пишет:
While profiling netgraph operation on UP HEAD router I have found that
huge amount of time it spent on memory allocation/deallocation:
I have forgotten to tell that it was mostly GENERIC kernel just built
without INVARIANTS, WITNESS and SMP but with 'profile 2'.
--
Ale
Hi.
While profiling netgraph operation on UP HEAD router I have found that
huge amount of time it spent on memory allocation/deallocation:
0.14 0.05 132119/545292 ip_forward [12]
0.14 0.05 133127/545292 fxp_add_rfabuf [18]
0.27 0.10 266236/545292 n
Dieter wrote:
What *exactly* do you mean by
machine still locks up with no activity for anywhere from 20 to 30 seconds.
Is there disk activity? (e.g. activity light(s) flashing if you have them)
Cant tell if there is disk activity its in a DC miles away ;)
Does top continue to update the sc
- Original Message -
From: "Eric Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I saw this once before, a long time back, and every time I went through a debugging session, it came to some kind of lock on the
sysctl tree with regards to the geom info (maybe the XML kind of tree dump or something). I
At Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:13:07 +0200,
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> After playing with many settings and testing various configuration, now
> I'm able to to receive on bridge more then 800,000 packets/s
> without errors, which is amazing!
> Unfortunately the server behind bridge can't h
At Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:49:14 +0100,
Erik Cederstrand wrote:
>
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >
> > This is coming along very nicely indeed!
> >
> > One suggestion I have is that as more metrics are added it becomes
> > important for an "at a glance" overview of changes so we can monitor for
> > perf
Alexander Motin wrote:
Julian Elischer пишет:
Alexander Motin wrote:
Hi.
While profiling netgraph operation on UP HEAD router I have found
that huge amount of time it spent on memory allocation/deallocation:
0.14 0.05 132119/545292 ip_forward [12]
0.14 0.05 133127/
16 matches
Mail list logo
