On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 06:28:48AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote:
> Steven Hartland wrote:
> >Yer know about the list but was looking for real usage experiences
> >as I've tried supported cards before e.g. netgear and it just panics the
> >machine with just ping :(
>
> I use the em cards (Intel Pro 1
Joao Barros wrote:
> On a P4 3.06GHz with HTT enabled and ULE I get the same results.
> I get a flat line at 58% looking at the bandwith in task manager on a
> Windows 2003 Server while doing a cached read.
> I can get up to 70% bandwith during writes.
> Percentages are relative to 100Mbits bandwit
Stanislav Sedov wrote:
I'd suggest you to disable open_basedir at all or roll out specialized
implementation. I had a lot of similar problems with open_basedir in
the past, so I just rewrote it to match our specific security policy.
Can you share a hint how exactly this specialized implementati
Stanislav Sedov wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 07:22:46PM +0200 Arkadi Shishlov mentioned:
Stanislav Sedov wrote:
Most basedir problems are linked with the fact it produce a lot of lstast/
readlinks on every require, include or open command. On Linux it pereforms
even worse, as they
Its probably "dirhash' that is not enabled or its cache is too small for the
task.
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubs
