On 11/16/2011 23:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 11/15/2011 02:09, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:07:45AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:51:35PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 1
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:59:06PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 11/16/2011 23:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> >> On 11/15/2011 02:09, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:07:45AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>
On 17.11.2011 11:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 11/15/2011 02:09, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:07:45AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:51:35PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 11/14/2011 12:3
On 11/17/2011 00:30, Daniil Cherednik wrote:
> I am sorry for repeat (I wrote about it), but what do you think about
> this hack:
Danill, thanks, and sorry if I wasn't clear before, but the problem
we're seeing has a very clear pattern:
74195 httpd0.13 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,0,0xbfbf
On 11/17/2011 00:12, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:59:06PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 11/16/2011 23:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 11/15/2011 02:09, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:12:10AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:59:06PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > On 11/16/2011 23:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > >> On 11/15/2011 02:09, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > >
Hello, Kostik.
You wrote 17 ноября 2011 г., 11:49:09:
> High-tech solution is to link with libunwind and add code into sigprocmask()
> to gather the stacks. But I expect that gdb attach is enough.
Proper high-tech solution is to use DTrace. It is very food in such
things.
--
// Black Lion AKA
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 01:26:49AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 11/17/2011 00:12, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:59:06PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> >> On 11/16/2011 23:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 1
On 2011-11-16 20:55, Alexander Motin wrote:
Hi.
On 16.11.2011 18:12, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
I'm getting these:
Nov 16 16:40:49 zfs kernel: ata6: port is not ready (timeout 15000ms)
tfd = 0080
Nov 16 16:40:49 zfs kernel: ata6: hardware reset timeout
Nov 16 16:41:50 zfs kernel: ata6: por
On 2011-11-16 18:22, Peter Maloney wrote:
Willem,
I can only guess, but...
Is AHCI enabled in the bios? If you are not using 'fake-raid' for any
disks, you should [depending on FreeBSD version, HBA, etc.] probably
enable AHCI. Some servers actually come with SATA set in IDE mode. And
if you are
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:03:26PM +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
> On 2011-11-16 18:22, Peter Maloney wrote:
> >Willem,
> >
> >I can only guess, but...
> >
> >Is AHCI enabled in the bios? If you are not using 'fake-raid' for any
> >disks, you should [depending on FreeBSD version, HBA, etc.] pro
On 2011-11-17 12:20, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:03:26PM +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
On 2011-11-16 18:22, Peter Maloney wrote:
Willem,
I can only guess, but...
Is AHCI enabled in the bios? If you are not using 'fake-raid' for any
disks, you should [depending on Fre
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Jeremy Chadwick
wrote:
> I don't use worker MPM on any of our boxes, we actually use ITK MPM
> solely because of the hosting nature of what we do. I've actually never
> seen worker MPM in use on any *IX machine I've been on or administrated,
> only prefork. The
On 17.11.2011 14:18, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:12:10AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:59:06PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 11/16/2011 23:49, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:46:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 11/15/2011 02:0
Color me perplexed.
3 of the 4 kernels I build were fine; the 4th one ... ugh.
I'm tracking stable/8 daily & rebuild as often as that (less if there
are no changes). I do this on 2 machines: my laptop (which only builds
for itself) and a "build machine" (named "freebeast"), which builds
GENERIC
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:41 AM, David Wolfskill wrote:
> MAKE=/usr/obj/usr/src/make.i386/make sh /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh GENERIC
> cc -c -O -pipe -std=c99 -g -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs
> -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
> -Wcast-qual -Wunde
The second of the Release Candidate builds for the 9.0-RELEASE release
cycle is now available. Since this is the first release of a brand
new branch I cross-post the announcements on both -current and -stable.
But just so you know most of the developers active in head and stable/9
pay more attent
Hi
This information can be interesting - in most cases really doesn't suffice
free() and someone is necessary with commit bit who it can to correct. reported
by cppcheck (http://cppcheck.sourceforge.net/):
This report is actual for FreeBSD 9.0-PRERELEASE
Scan for /usr/src/libexec/:
[rtld-elf/
Can anyone suggest why I am getting poor write performance from my nfs setup.
I have 2 x FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE i386 machines with ASUS P5B-plus mother boards,
4G mem and Dual core 3g processor using 147G 15k Seagate SAS drives with
onboard Gb network cards connected to an idle network. The results be
19 matches
Mail list logo
