On 7/15/13 7:13 AM, Glen Barber wrote:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 05:48:40AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 7/15/13 5:44 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.07.2013 08:38, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 13.07.2013 09:47, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Andre, we have a number of people running this patch in the
following configurations:
6-8GB ram + 10gigE ethernet using iozone over NFS.
As you haven't seen any problems yet I've asked RE to green light
the MFC.
RE has rejected the MFC out of fears for unexpected regressions.
That is unfortunate. I guess re@ doesn't understand that FreeBSD
9.2 will be unusable out of the box for doing 10gigE for more than a
few microseconds.
Can we not just do my original patch that has the check for 64bit
pointers before unscaling maxusers? That would be dirt simple and
just work with minimal risk.
IMHO, this is considered a new feature, and not a critical bug fix. re@
asked from the start of the code slush to avoid new features, and at
this point, it is too late. It is not worth introducing possible
regressions, which will only delay the 9.2-RELEASE.
Glen
OK, then we need a release notes telling people a sane value for
nmbclusters and friends so that they know how to make 10gigE work.
I'll poll my team for a value if someone else has one, that would be
even better.
--
Alfred Perlstein
VP Software Engineering, iXsystems
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
