On 6/1/07, Steven Hartland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wasn't Jack Vogel (Intel?) only talking the other day about
committing a new 10Gb Intel driver.
The "New driver coming soon" thread on current / net.
I'm talking about what is in the tree in the moment. I'll have to
withhold judgement on ix
Wasn't Jack Vogel (Intel?) only talking the other day about
committing a new 10Gb Intel driver.
The "New driver coming soon" thread on current / net.
Steve
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or e
My understanding is that ixgb in CVS is quite far behind the vendor driver.
Unfortunately, for high performance 10GigE on FreeBSD the only options
worth looking at the moment are cxgb (Chelsio T3) and mxge (Myricom).
Chelsio is selling eval kits right now:
http://www.chelsio.com/evalkits.php
Myr
ixgb(4) on 6.2-RELEASE-p5 says that the driver supports adapters based
on the 82597EX controller. The 10GbE CX4 uses the same chip, but isn't
in the list of explicitly listed hardware in the manpage. A quick peek
at the driver in the source tree shows that it does some
hardware-specific check
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 04:45:47PM -0300, NOC Meganet wrote:
> On Friday 01 June 2007 11:30:24 Arne W?rner wrote:
> > --- NOC Prowip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Why d?nt u use glabel?
> > >
> > > hmm, I never considered it
> > > but I guess it does not solve my problem because let's say da0
On Friday 01 June 2007 11:30:24 Arne Wörner wrote:
> --- NOC Prowip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Why dönt u use glabel?
> >
> > hmm, I never considered it
> > but I guess it does not solve my problem because let's say da0 is the
> > provider and da0 might have still the label I gave it but t
--- NOC Prowip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why dönt u use glabel?
> >
> hmm, I never considered it
> but I guess it does not solve my problem because let's say da0 is the
> provider and da0 might have still the label I gave it but the OS can not see
> it since it is then aacd0 after changing
On Friday 01 June 2007 10:14:23 Arne Wörner wrote:
> --- NOC Meganet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think it is not the best way having different hard disk device names. I
> > think it should be generally hd or something independent of type, driver
> > or controller.
>
> Why dönt u use glabel
--- NOC Meganet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it is not the best way having different hard disk device names. I
> think it should be generally hd or something independent of type, driver or
> controller.
>
Why dönt u use glabel?
-Arne
___
Hi all
I am not sure if this is exactly the right list but perhaps some could point
me to it.
I think it is not the best way having different hard disk device names. I
think it should be generally hd or something independent of type, driver or
controller.
Once I had trouble because I needed t
I set up one NFS server, and mounted on other server by TCP. Servers
connected with Giga network, and running 6.2-RELEASE.
But I found the performance is very bad while transfering large block size data.
For example, I use dd on NFS client to test the speed.
And ``systat -vm 1'' is displayed HDD
I set up one NFS server, and mounted on other server by TCP. Servers
connected with Giga network, and running 6.2-RELEASE.
But I found the performance is very bad while transfering large block size data.
For example, I use dd on NFS client to test the speed.
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/test bs=16k
12 matches
Mail list logo
