Hi,
I wonder if is possible to configure the gmirror rebuild speed.
Neither I've found any related info in the net nor the man pages.
--
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings
total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and
Bjoern A. Zeeb, I send you e-mail with link to download kernel and dump.
And I remade kernel panic situation on virtual machines.
You need 2 freebsd machines for gre tunnel.
First need just to make gre tunnel like:
ifconfig em0 inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
ifconfig gre0 create
ifconfig g
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:19:29AM +0200, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
> I wonder if is possible to configure the gmirror rebuild speed.
> Neither I've found any related info in the net nor the man pages.
To make it slower, I assume? When is that a good idea?
Cheers,
--
Andrew
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Chip Camden
wrote:
> lang/ghc is still marked IGNORE, unless I'm missing something.
Yes, if your system is older than 6.0 on i386 and older then 7.0 on
amd64, it is still ignored, since we do not support those platforms.
Otherwise it must be okay.
Cheers,
g.
___
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 06:59:54PM +1000, Andrew Reilly wrote:
> To make it slower, I assume? When is that a good idea?
When the rebuild is bringing your production system to
a crawl and you are willing to face the tradeoff - hopefully
because you have an additional backup for the worst c
To make it slower, I assume? When is that a good idea?
It depends on what status your server are.
For example:
- if I've a fsck in background so the I/O is high, maybe I want to make
it slower
- If the box is completey unloaded maybe I want to make it quicker
--
I must not fear. Fear is the
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:07:43 +0200
"Patrick M. Hausen" wrote:
> When the rebuild is bringing your production system to
> a crawl and you are willing to face the tradeoff - hopefully
> because you have an additional backup for the worst case.
Fair enough. I've noticed some slowdowns with re-buil
On 17 April 2010 00:53, Jack Vogel wrote:
> Why are you using ZERO_COPY_SOCKETS? And is this LOR happening on STABLE or
> CURRENT?
>
I got exactly this and another similar LORs with GENERIC on head.
The second:
login: lock order reversal:
1st 0xff0002539a18 em0:rx(0) (em0:rx(0)) @
/home/sv
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:13:49AM +0200, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
> >To make it slower, I assume? When is that a good idea?
>
> It depends on what status your server are.
> For example:
>
> - if I've a fsck in background so the I/O is high, maybe I want to
> make it slower
> - If the box is
Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
Hi,
I wonder if is possible to configure the gmirror rebuild speed.
Neither I've found any related info in the net nor the man pages.
This doesn't do exactly what you want, but might address your problem,
anyway: try "renice +20 [gmirror PID]", where "[gmirror PID]"
Looks like some form of regression in RELENG_8, between the dates of
2010/03/30 and 2010/04/22. My 2010/03/30 kernel (built from RELENG_8
source dated 2010/03/30 @ 10:30 PDT) doesn't have this problem.
Symptom: shutdown -p no longer powers off either of my systems; instead,
the box reboots (e.g.
FreeBSD Quarterly Status Report
Introduction
This report covers FreeBSD related projects between January and March
2010. Being the first of the four reports planned for 2010 with 46
entries, it shows a good progress of the FreeBSD Project and proves
that our committers are keeping up
Hello,
Thanks a lot for the patch, Qing!
It works fine. However I've noticed one thing, after I start mpd5 and
connect to my home network:
kernel: WARNING: attempt to domain_add(netgraph) after domainfinalize()
Not very sure if this is something to worry about or not?
Regards,
Marin
On Tue, A
--On Thursday, April 22, 2010 6:59 PM +1000 Andrew Reilly
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:19:29AM +0200, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
I wonder if is possible to configure the gmirror rebuild speed.
Neither I've found any related info in the net nor the man pages.
To make it slower, I as
on 22/04/2010 17:35 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> I went digging through HEAD commits between the above dates and wasn't
> able to find much other than this, which appears to be the HEAD commit
> that was MFC'd to RELENG_8:
>
> http://freshbsd.org/2010/04/02/23/04/31
I don't think this ha
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:21:05 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:21:05 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:21:05 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:21:24 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:21:24 -
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:19:27 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:19:27 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:19:27 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:19:43 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-04-23 01:19:43 -
On 22-04-2010 7:35, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> Looks like some form of regression in RELENG_8, between the dates of
> 2010/03/30 and 2010/04/22. My 2010/03/30 kernel (built from RELENG_8
> source dated 2010/03/30 @ 10:30 PDT) doesn't have this problem.
>
> Symptom: shutdown -p no longer powers off
18 matches
Mail list logo
