On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 11:13:06PM +0200, Pawel Tyll wrote:
> >> P.S. -- What's "BMC" stand for?
> > Baseband Management Controller. It's the separate NIC (sometimes it's
> > piggy-backed on a NIC) used for remote management of motherboards.
> > Usually includes IPMI support. Depending on the mot
In the last episode (Apr 12), Dan Nelson said:
> In the last episode (Apr 12), Denny Schierz said:
> > Am Montag, den 11.04.2011, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Denny Schierz:
> > > Am 11.04.2011 um 20:06 schrieb Tim Daneliuk:
> > > > Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of
> > >
Hi,
>> P.S. -- What's "BMC" stand for?
> Baseband Management Controller. It's the separate NIC (sometimes it's
> piggy-backed on a NIC) used for remote management of motherboards.
> Usually includes IPMI support. Depending on the motherboard, it may
> even include support for keyboard/video/mous
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jeremy Chadwick
wrote:
> P.S. -- What's "BMC" stand for?
Baseband Management Controller. It's the separate NIC (sometimes it's
piggy-backed on a NIC) used for remote management of motherboards.
Usually includes IPMI support. Depending on the motherboard, it may
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 09:35:11PM +0200, Przemyslaw Frasunek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm struggling with enabling serial console on Intel SR1630GP server
> platform and FreeBSD 7.4.
>
> In default configuration, my serial ports are detected correctly:
>
> sio0: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x3
On 11 April 2011 22:00, Denny Schierz wrote:
> hi,
>
> after testing severals loadbalancing (LACP) types with Cisco, we saw,
> that we never get more than 112MB/s with two network cards and iperf.
>
> So, we tested without loadbalancing, 4 Clients (iperf -f M -c ) and
> two target IPs. Every IP ha
Hello,
I'm struggling with enabling serial console on Intel SR1630GP server
platform and FreeBSD 7.4.
In default configuration, my serial ports are detected correctly:
sio0: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on
acpi0
sio0: type 16550A
sio0: [FILTER]
sio1: <16550A-com
Ian Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
> > On 11.4.2011 6:08, Ian Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > As you see, total of differences for each cpu is here 89 ticks, but I've
> > > no idea of the interval between your two readings, or your value of HZ?
> >
> > the interval may hav
On Mon, 11.04.2011 at 12:00:39 +0200, Denny Schierz wrote:
> hi,
>
> after testing severals loadbalancing (LACP) types with Cisco, we saw,
> that we never get more than 112MB/s with two network cards and iperf.
>
> So, we tested without loadbalancing, 4 Clients (iperf -f M -c ) and
> two target
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
> On 11.4.2011 6:08, Ian Smith wrote:
> >
> > As you see, total of differences for each cpu is here 89 ticks, but I've
> > no idea of the interval between your two readings, or your value of HZ?
>
> the interval may have been around 1-2 seconds.
> M
The cpu requirements are usually quite low for fsck, what your
most likely seeing is disk contention due to the amount of IO.
Personally I would recommend to consider moving to 8.2 + ZFS as
our filing system as it removes fsck from the equation, as well
as giving lots of other benefits.
Regar
In the last episode (Apr 12), Denny Schierz said:
> Am Montag, den 11.04.2011, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Denny Schierz:
> > Am 11.04.2011 um 20:06 schrieb Tim Daneliuk:
> > > Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of
> > > active-active ... just a thought...
> >
> > 150% sur
Hello,
we've experienced that background fsck on 8.1 degrades server performance on a
higher degree than in previous fbsd versions (6.3, 7.3; amd64).
We've noticed it after upgrading - same hardware - to a 8.1-RELEASE.
Now, performance of other services (i.e. apache, mysql) during a background
I updated to STABLE yesterday to get the net hast patches - all seemed fine,
so I went round and upgraded all the machines. But since then have been
fighting with some odd network issues - to the point where I have rolled
back to an earlier kernel to fix them.
The main issue for me appears to be t
hi,
Am Montag, den 11.04.2011, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Denny Schierz:
> hi,
>
> Am 11.04.2011 um 20:06 schrieb Tim Daneliuk:
>
> > Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of
> > active-active ...
> > just a thought...
>
> 150% sure. I used two dedicated NICs WITHOUT any
> Everything is detected correctly, everything comes up correctly. See
> a new option (reload) in the RC script for hast.
same here - have patched the master databse achines, all came up fine,
everything running erfectly, have flip-flopped between the two machines
with no ill effects whatsoever,
16 matches
Mail list logo