On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, John Long wrote:
> At 11:27 PM 3/22/2010, Alexander Motin wrote:
> >John Long wrote:
> >>Hello, I am putting together a couple update servers. Went with c2d
> >>E7500 on gigabyte G41M-ES2L boards. fbsd 8.0 release generic (so far)
> >>amd64, 1g mem, 1tb wd cavi
Harald Schmalzbauer schrieb am 14.03.2010 12:12 (localtime):
Harald Schmalzbauer schrieb am 13.03.2010 22:27 (localtime):
Am 03.03.2010 12:06, schrieb Jeremy Chadwick:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:28:25AM +0100, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
Alexander Motin schrieb am 03.03.2010 09:18 (localtime):
(8-STABLE/amd64 Feb 25th)
Hi,
This is the 1st time FreeBSD panics on me. It happened after a
minute of mounting an XFS partition. I'm not sure It's XFS but It's the
only part of the OS I try for the 1st time.
kernel: vn_iowait doing nothing on FreeBSD?
last message repeated 15 times
kernel:
ker
Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 03:22:04PM +0100, Attila Nagy wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have some recursive nameservers, running unbound and 7.2-STABLE #0:
>> Wed Sep 2 13:37:17 CEST 2009 on a bunch of HP BL460c machines (bce
>> interfaces).
>> These work OK.
>>
>> During the pr
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 09:39:40AM -0600, Michael Loftis wrote:
>
>
> --On Thursday, March 25, 2010 3:22 PM +0100 Attila Nagy wrote:
>
> <...>
> >Both unbound and python accepts DNS requests, and it seems when 25%
> >interrupt happens, only unbound is in *udp state, where it is 50%, both
> >pro
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 03:22:04PM +0100, Attila Nagy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have some recursive nameservers, running unbound and 7.2-STABLE #0:
> Wed Sep 2 13:37:17 CEST 2009 on a bunch of HP BL460c machines (bce
> interfaces).
> These work OK.
>
> During the process of migrating to 8.x, I've upg
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:11:00 +0100
Jack Raats wrote:
> I have an Exchange ActiveSync account and I would like to get this mail on my
> freebsd 7.3-stable server.
> I donn't haven an imap or pop account, only the information of the activesync
> account.
>
> Can anyone give me a clue how to achi
John Long wrote:
> Moved from another thread
>>> I csupd to stable amd64 8.0 and rebuilt then noticed from dmesg that
> I went from SATA150 (it should be SATA300) to >> udma100 SATA.
>>
>>This is a bug/quirk of some changes in ata(4). Your drive should be
>>operating at full SATA speed (probably S
Hi,
I have an Exchange ActiveSync account and I would like to get this mail on my
freebsd 7.3-stable server.
I donn't haven an imap or pop account, only the information of the activesync
account.
Can anyone give me a clue how to achieve this?
Thanks for your time!
Jack Raats
_
At 11:39 AM 3/25/2010, Michael Loftis wrote:
--On Thursday, March 25, 2010 3:22 PM +0100 Attila Nagy wrote:
<...>
Both unbound and python accepts DNS requests, and it seems when 25%
interrupt happens, only unbound is in *udp state, where it is 50%, both
programs are in that state.
Try turnin
--On Thursday, March 25, 2010 3:22 PM +0100 Attila Nagy wrote:
<...>
Both unbound and python accepts DNS requests, and it seems when 25%
interrupt happens, only unbound is in *udp state, where it is 50%, both
programs are in that state.
Try turning of hardware TSO/checksum offload if it's a
Hi,
I have some recursive nameservers, running unbound and 7.2-STABLE #0:
Wed Sep 2 13:37:17 CEST 2009 on a bunch of HP BL460c machines (bce
interfaces).
These work OK.
During the process of migrating to 8.x, I've upgraded one of these
machines to 8.0-STABLE #25: Tue Mar 9 18:15:34 CET 201
On 03/25/10 00:45, Michal wrote:
backend storage for databases. It's all well and good having 1 ZFS
server, but it's fragile in the the sense of no redundancy, then we have
1 ZFS server and a 2nd with DRBD, but that's a waste of money...think 12
TB, and you need to pay for another 12TB box for r
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:04:51 -0700
John Long wrote:
> I want to thank you very much for all the info you have provided. It has
> clued me into a much better understanding and I see that it is a big
> un-standard thing to monitor these functions. It seems that things are
FYI: for (some) Asus b
On 25/03/2010 08:54, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:45:25PM +, Michal wrote:
>> I am thinking a cheap solution but one that
>> has IO throughput, redundancy and is easy to manange and expand across
>> multiple nodes
>
> Fast, reliable, cheap. Pick any two.
Hi, all,
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:45:25PM +, Michal wrote:
> I am thinking a cheap solution but one that
> has IO throughput, redundancy and is easy to manange and expand across
> multiple nodes
Fast, reliable, cheap. Pick any two.
IMHO this is just as true today as it was twenty years ago
16 matches
Mail list logo
