Dan Nelson schrieb:
In the last episode (Jan 23), Rahul Siddharthan said:
Kenneth Culver wrote:
Did you by any chance build your own kernel? If so did you leave
things like this in:
options INVARIANTS #Enable calls of extra sanity
options INVARIANT_SUPPORT #
> From: Atte Peltomaki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> > > If it's long enough to pause the console noticibly, the
> next thing
> > > to try is breaking to the debugger -- which might require an NMI
> > > card -- to see what code it's stuck in during the pause.
> >
> > It's noticeable - if you
> > If it's long enough to pause the console noticibly, the next
> > thing to try is breaking to the debugger -- which might require
> > an NMI card -- to see what code it's stuck in during the pause.
>
> It's noticeable - if you type under heavy load in console, you
> experience similar to ssh la
On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Nate Lawson wrote:
> > > > Every time machine is under heavy load (CPU, network, disks) it
> > > > completely jamms for fraction of a second for every ten seconds or so,
> > > > everything just stops and then continues. I noticed this while compiling
> >
Nate Lawson wrote:
> > > Every time machine is under heavy load (CPU, network, disks) it
> > > completely jamms for fraction of a second for every ten seconds or so,
> > > everything just stops and then continues. I noticed this while compiling
> > > software and copying files over NFS while listen
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Atte Peltomaki wrote:
> > Description:
> >
> > Every time machine is under heavy load (CPU, network, disks) it
> > completely jamms for fraction of a second for every ten seconds or so,
> > everything just stops and then continues. I noticed this while c
> > > If you lean on the keyboard, or if you set up the network adapters
> > > as "entropy" sources, does the problem fix itself?
> >
> > If you're thinking it's /dev/random blocking on him, 5.0's output never
> > blocks. Its output is a PRNG periodically seeded from random data,
> > including in
Just a "me too".
I have a procmail filter that uses spamassissin to filter all my incomming mail
(downloaded with fetchmail). I have noticed that if I get a lot of messages at
once, interactive response degrades tremendously with a lot of perl processes
stuck in either swread or pfault state. The
Dan Nelson wrote:
> > If you lean on the keyboard, or if you set up the network adapters
> > as "entropy" sources, does the problem fix itself?
>
> If you're thinking it's /dev/random blocking on him, 5.0's output never
> blocks. Its output is a PRNG periodically seeded from random data,
> includ
In the last episode (Jan 23), Terry Lambert said:
> Atte Peltomaki wrote:
> > Description:
> >
> > Every time machine is under heavy load (CPU, network, disks) it
> > completely jamms for fraction of a second for every ten seconds or so,
> > everything just stops and then continues. I noticed this
Atte Peltomaki wrote:
> Description:
>
> Every time machine is under heavy load (CPU, network, disks) it
> completely jamms for fraction of a second for every ten seconds or so,
> everything just stops and then continues. I noticed this while compiling
> software and copying files over NFS while l
> H and < should only make a difference if you are low on memory. R is on
> by default in 5.0 anyway, due to A and J being on by default. Setting
> malloc.conf to "aj" makes it work like it does in 4.*.
Here are some benchmarks to illustrate that, using ubench (from
/usr/ports/benchmarks) on a du
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 02:14:46PM -0500, Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
> Dan Nelson wrote:
> > > # ls -l /etc/malloc.conf
> > > lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 4 Jan 23 11:52 /etc/malloc.conf -> HR<
> >
> > H and < should only make a difference if you are low on memory.
>
> Yes.
>
> > R is on
> > by de
In the last episode (Jan 23), Rahul Siddharthan said:
> Dan Nelson wrote:
> > > # ls -l /etc/malloc.conf
> > > lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 4 Jan 23 11:52 /etc/malloc.conf -> HR<
> >
> > H and < should only make a difference if you are low on memory.
>
> Yes.
>
> > R is on
> > by default in 5.0
Dan Nelson wrote:
> > # ls -l /etc/malloc.conf
> > lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 4 Jan 23 11:52 /etc/malloc.conf -> HR<
>
> H and < should only make a difference if you are low on memory.
Yes.
> R is on
> by default in 5.0 anyway, due to A and J being on by default.
That's not what the malloc(3
In the last episode (Jan 23), Rahul Siddharthan said:
> Kenneth Culver wrote:
> > Did you by any chance build your own kernel? If so did you leave
> > things like this in:
> >
> > options INVARIANTS #Enable calls of extra sanity
> > options INVARIANT_SUPPORT #Ext
Kenneth Culver wrote:
> > I hope someone could bring light to what's going on. Alltho I'm not
> > whining, I knew what I was getting myself into when I installed 5.0, it
> > would be nice get things solved, for FreeBSD's sake already.
>
> Did you by any chance build your own kernel? If so did you
> I hope someone could bring light to what's going on. Alltho I'm not
> whining, I knew what I was getting myself into when I installed 5.0, it
> would be nice get things solved, for FreeBSD's sake already.
Did you by any chance build your own kernel? If so did you leave things
like this in:
opti
I've used 5.0-RELEASE for few days now, and I've been experiencing some
serious performance problems. I haven't had the time to examine it more
closely, and frankly, I have no clue where to start looking for. Perhaps
someone knows what this is all about.
Description:
Every time machine is under h
19 matches
Mail list logo
