On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 03:02:09PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2013, at 7:04 AM, Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA
> >> stack, using on
On Mar 31, 2013, at 7:04 AM, Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA
>> stack, using only some controller drivers of old ata(4) by having
>> `options ATA_CA
TB --- 2013-03-31 19:19:20 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca
TB --- 2013-03-31 19:19:20 - FreeBSD freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca 9.1-RELEASE
FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012
r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2013
TB --- 2013-03-31 18:15:12 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca
TB --- 2013-03-31 18:15:12 - FreeBSD freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca 9.1-RELEASE
FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012
r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2013
TB --- 2013-03-31 18:15:12 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca
TB --- 2013-03-31 18:15:12 - FreeBSD freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca 9.1-RELEASE
FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012
r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2013
TB --- 2013-03-31 18:15:12 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca
TB --- 2013-03-31 18:15:12 - FreeBSD freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca 9.1-RELEASE
FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012
r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2013
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA
> stack, using only some controller drivers of old ata(4) by having
> `options ATA_CAM` enabled in all kernels by default. I have a wish to
> drop no
On 31.03.2013 13:07, Markiyan Kushnir wrote:
Hi John,
I also measured svnup basic process resource usage, attaching a complete
plot (measurements were taken each 2 seconds based on ps(1) and
procstat(1)). Hopefully it will help you as well.
(in case it's not available through the list)
https
ups, sorry:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9Q-zpUXxqCnRVVMTkk1blVfZzA/edit?usp=sharing
Please let me know if you have problems with accessing it.
--
Markiyan
On 31.03.2013 13:18, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
I also measured svnup basic process resource usage, attaching a complete
plot (measurem
Am 31.03.2013 06:00, schrieb Peter Wemm:
> We're talking about 10.x, so if you want it fixed, you need update
> with 10.x information.
>
> Please put 10.x diagnostics in the PR.
I will not. The PR was filed four months before 10-CURRENT branched;
I have no reason to assume it were to be no long
Hi John,
I also measured svnup basic process resource usage, attaching a complete
plot (measurements were taken each 2 seconds based on ps(1) and
procstat(1)). Hopefully it will help you as well.
--
Markiyan.
On 31.03.2013 12:51, Markiyan Kushnir wrote:
On 25.03.2013 02:55, John Mehr wrote:
On 25.03.2013 02:55, John Mehr wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 05:55:19 +0200
Markiyan Kushnir wrote:
Hello John,
Tested svnup for a while, and I can say it does its job well, and
works basically as I would expect, so thanks for your initiative.
Although it appears to be quite resource greedy.
On 31.03.2013 08:13, Ian Smith wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:24 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Matthias Andree
wrote:
> > Am 27.03.2013 22:22, schrieb Alexander Motin:
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based
13 matches
Mail list logo