-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
what do you think for HyperThreading (P4 GHz), which serves FBSD 6.3?
Now it's disabled by the BIOS but since today I've upgraded the machine
5.5 to 6.3 though if under 6.XX series it worths or not.
I've read for performance penalties under 5.XX
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Andrew Thompson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:26:35PM +0200, Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Greetings,
In my desire to increase network throughput, and to be able to
handle more then ~250-270kpps
I started experimenting with lagg and link aggregation control
protocol (lacp
Andrew Thompson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:26:35PM +0200, Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Greetings,
In my desire to increase network throughput, and to be able to handle more
then ~250-270kpps
I started experimenting with lagg and link aggregation control protocol
(lacp).
To my surprise this
On 2008.02.04. 20:36, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
At Sun, 03 Feb 2008 20:24:25 +0100,
Attila Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, if bind was built with threads, the memory usage always grew behind
max-cache-size very quickly.
Here is the log:
http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memo
At Sun, 03 Feb 2008 20:24:25 +0100,
Attila Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, if bind was built with threads, the memory usage always grew behind
> max-cache-size very quickly.
>
> Here is the log:
> http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memory-20080203/bind950b1
> the memory usage (RSS,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:26:35PM +0200, Stefan Lambrev wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> In my desire to increase network throughput, and to be able to handle more
> then ~250-270kpps
> I started experimenting with lagg and link aggregation control protocol
> (lacp).
> To my surprise this doesn't increas
Greetings,
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Greetings,
In my desire to increase network throughput, and to be able to handle
more then ~250-270kpps
I started experimenting with lagg and link aggregation control
protocol (lacp).
To my surprise this doesn't increase the amount of packets my server
can ha
Greetings,
In my desire to increase network throughput, and to be able to handle
more then ~250-270kpps
I started experimenting with lagg and link aggregation control protocol
(lacp).
To my surprise this doesn't increase the amount of packets my server can
handle
Here is what netstat reports
Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > you mean FILO or LIFO right?
> > Uh, no. You want to reuse the last-freed object, as it is most
> > likely to still be in cache.
> exactly.. FILO or L
