On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 06:13:04PM -0400, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> Here is what I have on the server now:
>
> and loader.conf
>
> accf_http_load="YES"
You shouldn't bother with this. Let the apache22 rc.d script handle
loading it dynamically. Use apache22_http_accept_enable="yes" in
rc.conf.
I'v
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
Doug Barton wrote:
The Apache page:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.3/misc/perf-tuning.html
It mentions FIN_WAIT_2 not 1, so this might be a different/new problem.
IIRC it actually is the same problem, but in any case you're missing
the bit where 4.x is EOL. :) Hence m
Doug Barton wrote:
Robert Blayzor wrote:
On May 28, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
That's a known problem with FreeBSD 4, which is now well past EOL. I
would suggest moving to FreeBSD 7 ASAP.
Is it? I searched and searched and never found any hits or PR's
regarding this.
Not sure
Robert Blayzor wrote:
On May 28, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
That's a known problem with FreeBSD 4, which is now well past EOL. I
would suggest moving to FreeBSD 7 ASAP.
Is it? I searched and searched and never found any hits or PR's
regarding this.
Not sure where you looked th
Robert Blayzor wrote:
On May 28, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
You didn't mention which version of FreeBSD you are running-- that's
rather important info.
Actually, I just checked, this is a 4.11 server, I thought it was
running at least 6.2.
That's a known problem with FreeBSD 4, w
On May 28, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
That's a known problem with FreeBSD 4, which is now well past EOL. I
would suggest moving to FreeBSD 7 ASAP.
Is it? I searched and searched and never found any hits or PR's
regarding this. When was it first fixed? 5.x? 6.x? or not until
On May 28, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
You didn't mention which version of FreeBSD you are running-- that's
rather important info.
Actually, I just checked, this is a 4.11 server, I thought it was
running at least 6.2.
00200 allow tcp from any to me 80 setup
00200 allow icmp fro
Hi--
You didn't mention which version of FreeBSD you are running-- that's
rather important info.
On May 28, 2008, at 3:13 PM, Robert Blayzor wrote:
ipfw:
00200 allow tcp from any to me 80 setup
00200 allow icmp from any to me icmptype 0,3,8,11
00200 deny log ip from any to me
Also, surely
I have a rather busy Apache 2.2 server; tons of small & some large
requests. It's a standard Dell 2650 server using the bge (broadcom)
network driver.
I seem to have a rather strange problem where after just a day or so
Apache just stops processing new connections. You can connect to port
On 28 May 2008, at 20:57, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Hello,
my buildworld on a 7-stable-amd64 blocks on the following line :
TERM=dumb TERMCAP=dumb: ex - /files/bsd/src7/share/termcap/
termcap.src < /files/bsd/src7/share/termcap/reorder
ex(1) stays in lockd state, and is unkillable, either b
Hello,
my buildworld on a 7-stable-amd64 blocks on the following line :
TERM=dumb TERMCAP=dumb: ex - /files/bsd/src7/share/termcap/termcap.src <
/files/bsd/src7/share/termcap/reorder
ex(1) stays in lockd state, and is unkillable, either by Ctl-C or
kill -9
/files/bsd is nfs-mounted as follows
Hello,
i have configured lagg interface on two Broacom (bce0 bce1).
I have tried with laggproto lacp (supported by the Nortel switch), with fce
and failover, but they all shows the same symptom:
Everything works fine until i unplug the cable of the first interface
(bce0), it will
show status: n
On Wed, 28 May 2008 09:28:23 +0900 Pyun YongHyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about Re: broken re(4):
PY> > Any hints what I should do next to find the culprit?
PY> There were similiar reports on this issue. It seems that it's very
PY> hard to make re(4) work so many RTL8168/8169/8111 revisions w
On Wednesday 28 May 2008 01:15:18 Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Hello list!
>
>
> When em0 has an inet address while bridge0 doesn't, it seems to be OK:
> -
> bs1% uname -a
> FreeBSD bs1.sp34.ru 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Sun May 25
> 20:15:26 MSD 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/s
On Wed, 28 May 2008 09:28:23 +0900 Pyun YongHyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about Re: broken re(4):
PY> > Any hints what I should do next to find the culprit?
PY> There were similiar reports on this issue. It seems that it's very
PY> hard to make re(4) work so many RTL8168/8169/8111 revisions wi
Guido Falsi ha scritto:
I discovered the same thing while experimenting with qemu and bridgeng.
I think it simply works different from (for example) widnows bridging.
I think it's meant to be like that.
It also looks more logical either. I think of the bridge as just a
packet router, which ro
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 02:15:18AM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Hello list!
>
>
> When em0 has an inet address while bridge0 doesn't, it seems to be OK:
[...]
> Did I miss something? Thanks!
I discovered the same thing while experimenting with qemu and bridgeng.
I think it simply works diffe
--- Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 27, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Unga wrote:
> > Appreciate if Chuck Swiger could enlighten us
> again on
> > what priority X run on Mac OSX? realtime or
> normal?
>
> The X11 server seems to run with mildly elevated
> priority (46, where
> realtime is
18 matches
Mail list logo
