Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
On 3 May 2010 03:31, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: > >I will print this mail and laugh everyday with it. :) > This is especially for you, Victor. Print that too please, and laugh everyday :): ab -n 1 -c 10 127.0.0.1/1.tar.gz Apache 1.3.29 Requests per second:149.23 [#/sec] (mean) Apache 2.2.2 Requests per second:375.02 [#/sec] (mean)
Re: Firebird SQL
Every time a configure script fails, you read what actually did fail in the config.log it produces. Every time. 2010/4/30 R0me0 *** > Hello there, > > I4m trying to compile firebird 2.0.5 from source on openbsd 4.4 > > I Have the follow error: > > # ./configure > checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes > checking build system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > checking host system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > checking target system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > configure: error: unsupported platform i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > But looking into configure script, I see routines for OpenBSD > Someone can help-me ? > > Thanks in Advanced > > -- To our sweethearts and wives. May they never meet. -- 19th century toast
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
Hups # apache2 -v Server version: Apache/2.2.8 (Ubuntu) Server built: Mar 9 2010 20:45:36 Requests per second:125.07 [#/sec] (mean) # apache2 -v Server version: Apache/2.2.11 (Ubuntu) Server built: Nov 13 2009 22:06:57 Requests per second:10108.85 [#/sec] (mean) Are you using your servers in production or your benchmarking tools? On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Dexter Tomisson wrote: > On 3 May 2010 03:31, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: > >> >I will print this mail and laugh everyday with it. :) >> > > > This is especially for you, Victor. Print that too please, and laugh > everyday :): > > ab -n 1 -c 10 127.0.0.1/1.tar.gz > > Apache 1.3.29 > Requests per second: B B 149.23 [#/sec] (mean) > > Apache 2.2.2 > Requests per second: B B 375.02 [#/sec] (mean) > > -- http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Dexter Tomisson wrote: ab -n 1 -c 10 127.0.0.1/1.tar.gz Apache 1.3.29 Requests per second:149.23 [#/sec] (mean) Apache 2.2.2 Requests per second:375.02 [#/sec] (mean) Apache2 is significantly more complex: ktrace -f /tmp/a2-ktrace.log -di /usr/local/sbin/httpd2 ktrace -f /tmp/a1-ktrace.log -di /usr/sbin/httpd -rw--- 1 root wheel 637834 May 3 10:58 /tmp/a1-ktrace.log -rw--- 1 root wheel 2316108 May 3 10:56 /tmp/a2-ktrace.log ktrace -f /tmp/a2-ktrace.log -dit c /usr/local/sbin/httpd2 ktrace -f /tmp/a1-ktrace.log -dit c /usr/sbin/httpd -rw--- 1 root wheel 354900 May 3 11:09 /tmp/a1-ktrace.log -rw--- 1 root wheel 1517512 May 3 11:09 /tmp/a2-ktrace.log
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
On Mon, 3 May 2010 10:10:01 +0300 Dexter Tomisson wrote: > This is especially for you, Victor. Print that too please, and laugh > everyday :): > > ab -n 1 -c 10 127.0.0.1/1.tar.gz > > Apache 1.3.29 > Requests per second:149.23 [#/sec] (mean) > > Apache 2.2.2 > Requests per second:375.02 [#/sec] (mean) And while you're at it, please add nginx to the mix :) -- Jure PeD ar http://jure.pecar.org
A propos de votre NewsLetter
NewsLetter
Re: No ACPI battery/ac status readings on a ASUS UL30A laptop.
2010/4/29 Torbjxrn H. Orskaug : > 2010/4/29 Peter Hessler : >> what happens if you remove and reinsert the power cord, does it do the >> same thing? >> > > Yep. > Just a quick update on this. I recompiled my kernel with ACPI_DEBUG enabled and I can see that after physically removing and reinserting the battery, the _STA method returns 0x1f and everything works as expected. I guess I'm just stuck with a broken BIOS/AML and I'll make a habit of removing and reinserting the battery of this laptop if I really need battery charge status.
Re: partitions
On 05/02/10 21:20, Matthew Dempsky wrote: On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Chris Bennett wrote: Well, /usr/ports is updated, but never needs to be erased unless really messed up by user error That's true of /usr/src too though, right? Here is a guess: Perhaps this is true for xenocara also. The growth rate of ports is probably fast enough to make keeping a stable partition size a problem. /usr/src's size probably grows very slowly. Of course, I could be totally wrong.
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
Just for update. OpenSolaris in VM Server Software:Apache/2.2.14 Requests per second:396.00 [#/sec] (mean) Server Software:Apache/1.3.41 Requests per second:1284.49 [#/sec] (mean) Comparing it with previous results from Ubuntu and your results it seems to be very "useful" in comparisons ;-) On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Dexter Tomisson wrote: > On 3 May 2010 03:31, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: > >> >I will print this mail and laugh everyday with it. :) >> > > > This is especially for you, Victor. Print that too please, and laugh > everyday :): > > ab -n 1 -c 10 127.0.0.1/1.tar.gz > > Apache 1.3.29 > Requests per second: B B 149.23 [#/sec] (mean) > > Apache 2.2.2 > Requests per second: B B 375.02 [#/sec] (mean) > > -- http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
why doesn't openbsd do X? the license is not acceptable | benchmarking tools don't tell the full story | you do not understand the security implications of what you suggest in your case it's all 3 of the above. get a clue and do your homework before you post stupid stuff.
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
On 2010-05-03, Dexter Tomisson wrote: > On 3 May 2010 03:31, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: > >> >I will print this mail and laugh everyday with it. :) >> > > > This is especially for you, Victor. Print that too please, and laugh > everyday :): > > ab -n 1 -c 10 127.0.0.1/1.tar.gz > > Apache 1.3.29 > Requests per second:149.23 [#/sec] (mean) > > Apache 2.2.2 > Requests per second:375.02 [#/sec] (mean) so? base httpd isn't about performance, it's about providing something that works well enough, gives people a reasonable set of features, and under an acceptable license. lighttpd 1.4.26 Document Length:5600 bytes Concurrency Level: 10 Time taken for tests: 2.751 seconds Complete requests: 1 Failed requests:0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 5852 bytes HTML transferred: 5600 bytes Requests per second:3634.91 [#/sec] (mean) ...but then, lighty doesn't do things many people have come to expect from a general-purpose webserver...
Re: Firebird SQL
On 2010-04-30, R0me0 *** wrote: > Hello there, > > I4m trying to compile firebird 2.0.5 from source on openbsd 4.4 > > I Have the follow error: > > # ./configure > checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes > checking build system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > checking host system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > checking target system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > configure: error: unsupported platform i386-unknown-openbsd4.4 > But looking into configure script, I see routines for OpenBSD autoconf generates a configure script from an application's configure.in, configure.ac or similar file, and a bunch of other files. The OpenBSD routines you see are from one of those other files, they aren't enough. Firebird's configure.in specifically tests for certain types of OS, and does not support OpenBSD as it stands.
Re: OpenBSD disk scheduler
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Luis Useche wrote: > Reading some archives, I found people saying that OpenBSD has no disk > scheduler. My first question is: is this true? If so, what is the reason? Is > it technical or there are no resources for this? OpenBSD has a disk scheduler, of course, but only the standard elevator algorithm. There aren't any plugins or whatnot, which is a combination of not being sufficiently necessary and nobody doing the work.
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
With apache 1.3 being simpler I would imagine it has more scope for speed than apache 2. Which is faster, would be interesting but testing has to be thought out well, depending on what you are hoping to prove. ab can be used for some comparison tests but wouldn't reflect performance for live traffic which would have to be replayed or cleverly produced for each server and any tests would be affected by many factors which you would need to control and monitor, without those monitors affecting the system. Even if apache 2.2 was twice as fast, you are going to need multiple connections and servers for high loads and redundancy at some point. So speed helps reduce costs but I'd much rather have two more secure apaches than one less secure one handling the same amount of traffic. After all, insurance for payment gateways is tied to security breaches (often client side), it would be nice if people using OpenBSD got a discount, rather than being less! likely to be penalised :-) It would be fairer if people using OpenBSD on their desktops could get lower interest loans too or if microsoft had to compensate the banks and the world for insecurity and crafty/stupid instability. OpenBSD does more when running each process for security reasons and so is arguably slower than Linux, but also does less by default and so is faster than most distros. It's still blisteringly fast, especially where it counts and if I had to choose one OS to use it would be OpenBSD.
Re: addendum: 4.7 causes different problem Re: spurious "need to frag" messages
Hi, On Wed, 17.03.2010 at 17:48:21 +0100, Toni Mueller wrote: > On Mon, 15.03.2010 at 19:10:12 +0100, Toni Mueller > wrote: > > # pfctl -s a |grep mss > > # ifconfig|grep mtu|grep -v 1500 > > lo0: flags=8049 mtu 33152 > > enc0: flags=41 mtu 1536 > > pflog0: flags=141 mtu 33152 > > # > > > > And that's it... > > > Sample message from tcpdump: > > > > 19:03:59.805030 1.2.3.4 > 5.6.7.8: icmp: 1.2.3.20 unreachable - need to > > frag (mtu 1420) for 5.6.7.8.80 > 1.2.3.20.59495: 2079874237 [|tcp] (DF) > > (ttl 243, id 22121, len 1500) (ttl 255, id 23060, len 56) > > > I've rebooted the machine, and the problem went away. I don't know for > how long, though. after doing this now for some time, I go out on a limb and say that this is a memory management problem somewhere in the realm of 'pf', as the problem apparently correllates to the amount of traffic pushed. If someone is willing to help me debug this, please contact me off-list. Thank you! -- Kind regards, --Toni++
Kernel panic on shutdown -p -- ACPI problem?
Hello!
I've recently "rediscovered" a computer that I'd been using as a
Linux fileserver a few years ago. Since it's hardware is
considerably better than the even older machine I'm using now as
an OpenBSD fileserver, I tried if I could make it run.
In principle, everything works fine, to some extent much smoother
than on Linux (especially getting the sensors to work back then
was a true nightmare, and I eventually gave up in defeat -- on
OpenBSD, they just work).
However, if I do `shutdown -h -p` (thus power off), I get a
kernel panic; specifically, "AML PARSE ERROR" (see below). This
only happens when doing '-p' is involved somehow; rebooting
works, and just '-h' without '-p' does, too.
I've done some research, and it turns out that the motherboard
seems to a particularly buggy ACPI tables. And just as well, if I
disable ACPI, the kernel panic vanishes. However, the machine
doesn't get turned off as well, so it's not really a victory.
All this was done using 4.6 release, as this was a few months
ago.
Before I do any further research or experiments with that
machine, I just wanted to ask if I'd have any chances to work
against this problems. As far as I understood from some ancient
NetBSD mailinglist threads, in theory it should be possible
to somehow do something such that the kernel loads patched ACPI
tables which have those particular bugs corrected. So, if this
would be possible on OpenBSD, I knew that I should spend some
more time on this, without it being wasted.
The motherboard in question is a Tyan Tiger S2466 dual-Athon
multiprocessor board, with both processor sockets filled. As
already said, not the most recent of mainboard imaginable, so I
don't think that trying 4.7 would be much difference, especially
as it seems that the bug is in the BIOS, not in OpenBSD.
If anyone has a pointer---a "no, it won't work" would be more
than helpful, too---, I'd be grateful. If I could get that thing
to work again, my poor student's budget would be saved yet
another expense. ;o)
Regards,
Stefan
Here is the kernel panic that I've recorded from the machine.
Unfortunately, I've lost the dmesg that I thought I had prepared;
if there _is_ a chance to make this work, I'll post it as soon as
I again have some floor space to set it up again.
| syscing disks... done
| ### AML PARSE ERROR (0x455): Undefined name: IO2B
| multiply freed item 0xd1d62b00
| panic: free: duplicated free
| Stopped at Debugger+0x4:leave
|
| ddb{0}> trace
| Debugger(d0825e18,8,dc247d60,d1d62b00,21) at Debugger+0x4
| panic(d0717761,d1d62b00,dc247de0,d06ce12b,40) at panic+0x55
| free(d1d62b00,21,3f9,0) at free+0x40
| aml_freevalue(d1d62c44,d0817227,75d) at aml_freevalue+0xdb
| aml_xpopscope(d1d62c44,54,d0817578,d1c06504,dc247eac) at aml_xpopscope+0x81
| aml_xeval(0,d1c06504,74,1,dc247e78,dc247e72,dc247e90,d04c8555) at
aml_xeval+0x13f
| aml_evalnode(d1bfec00,d1c06544,1,dc247e78,0,1,dc247ea0,d06c90c7) at
aml_evalnode+0x57
| acpi_prepare_sleep_state(d1bfec00,5,dc247f00,d04ab607) at
acpi_prepare_sleep_state+0xfa
| acpi_powerdown(d0944b60,d6a62420,dc247f20,d035f7f8,1008) at
acpi_powerdown+0x22
| boot(1009,0,0,0,d0824a34) at boot+0x190
| __stack_smash_handler(d6a62420,dc247f68,dc247f58,d6a62420) at
__stack_smash_handler
| syscall() at syscall+0x12b
| --- syscall (number 55) ---
| 0x1c000a59:
|
| ddb{0}> ps
| PIDPPID PGRP UID S FLAGS WAITCOMMAND
| *11147 111147 0 7 0x42004000 halt
| 15 00 0 3 0x2100200 bored crypto
| 14 00 0 3 0x2100200 aiodonedaiodonec
| 13 00 0 3 0x2100200 syncer update
| 12 00 0 3 0x2100200 cleaner cleaner
| 11 00 0 3 0x100200reaper reaper
| 10 00 0 3 0x2100200 pgdaemonpagedaemon
| 9 00 0 3 0x2100200 pftmpfpurge
| 8 00 0 3 0x2100200 usbtsk usbtask
| 7 00 0 3 0x2100200 usbevt usb0
| 6 00 0 3 0x2100200 acpi_idle acpi0
| 5 00 0 7 0x40100200 idle1
| 4 00 0 3 0x2100200 bored syswq
| 3 00 0 3 0x40100200 idle0
| 2 00 0 3 0x2100200 kmalloc kmthread
| 1 01 0 3 0x2004080 waitinit
| 0 -1 0 0 3 0x2080200 scheduler swapper
56 tipos de listas segmentadas com 7.257.860 e-mails
Caso nco esteja visualizando esse e-mail, veja na versco online 56 Tipos de listas diferentes contendo mais de 7.257.860 e-mails. Divulgue os seus produtos e Servigos pela Internet de modo FACIL e ECONTMICO. TODAS AS LISTAS EM ATE 12 X NO CARTAO ! Conhega os nossos produtos e as nossas Promogues Conheca nossos produtos, Acesse nossa Loja Virtual Conheca nossos produtos, Acesse nossa Loja Virtual Conheca nossos produtos, Acesse nossa Loja Virtual Caso nco queira receber nossos informativos, envie um e-mail para: vendasemailmarketingvirt...@gmail.com, com o assunto: Quero sair da Lista [IMAGE]
OpenBSD release party Amsterdam
May 19 OpenBSD 4.7 will be released, may 20 there will be a release party in Amsterdam. The plan is the same as usual: 18:00 gathering in front of De Deugniet, we will find some food in the neighborhood that has lots of places where we can eat. >From 20:00 on we will gather into De Deugniet itself and have a drink on OpenBSD 4.7! Cafe de Deugniet Oude Brugsteeg 12, 1012 JP Amsterdam http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=De+Deugniet,+Oude brugsteeg+12,+1012+JP+Amsterdam,+Netherlands&sll=52.375285,4.897585&sspn=0.03 8303,0.052099&ie=UTF8&hq=De+Deugniet,&hnear=Oudebrugsteeg+12,+1012+Amsterdam, +The+Netherlands&ll=52.375691,4.897585&spn=0.008803,0.013025&t=h&z=16 -- Floor Terra www: http://brobding.mine.nu/
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
> OpenBSD does more when running each process for security reasons and so > is arguably slower than Linux, but also does less by default and so is > faster than most distros. It's still blisteringly fast, especially where > it counts and if I had to choose one OS to use it would be OpenBSD. > I informally compared Slackware with OpenBSD. Slackware boots faster, but OpenBSD uses only 6mb of memory, while Slackware consumes something around 50mb. (Right after the boot, without X, default setup)
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
On 05/02/10 20:31, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: OpenBSD's stock httpd is very slow and outdated. It is about 6 years old. Almost an abandonware. I will print this mail and laugh everyday with it. :) Ya, me too. It'll sit beside your laughable emails where you argued that the GPL is more free than the BSD/ISC license. That whole 'definition of freedom' thing is still hilarious! -- - RSM www.erratic.ca
Re: low httpd performance. Apache 2.2 as default? never? *sighs
wow what a useful comparison. On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 10:04:45PM -0300, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: > > OpenBSD does more when running each process for security reasons and so > > is arguably slower than Linux, but also does less by default and so is > > faster than most distros. It's still blisteringly fast, especially where > > it counts and if I had to choose one OS to use it would be OpenBSD. > > > > I informally compared Slackware with OpenBSD. Slackware boots faster, > but OpenBSD uses only 6mb of memory, while Slackware consumes something > around 50mb. (Right after the boot, without X, default setup)
CD's are here
Yes, we have some new cd's, We have some new cd's today, ole! ;) Prior silly exuberance probably has no meaning to the younger generation. Maybe some other old farts like me will recall the song it's a parodying. ;) Complete package arrived unscathed. Even a cool sticker on the outside of the package. Was able to reuse it on my laptop. Great work as always! -- === Denny White - denny...@cableone.net GnuPG key : 0x1644E79A | http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net Fingerprint: D0A9 AD44 1F10 E09E 0E67 EC25 CB44 F2E5 1644 E79A === () ASCII ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ===
