* Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080220 13:42] wrote:
> Chuck Swiger wrote:
> >On Feb 20, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >>>Take a look at the level of packet fragmentation you are encountering;
> >>>yes, this is expected and things will work but there is extra latency
> >>>added w
At Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:30:07 -0700,
JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW, is this reproduceable on FreeBSD 6.x? If so, then I'd like to
> see what happens if you specify some small value of datasize
> (e.g. 512MB) and have named abort when malloc() fails with the "X"
> _malloc_options.
Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Feb 20, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Take a look at the level of packet fragmentation you are encountering;
yes, this is expected and things will work but there is extra latency
added when the IP stack has to reassemble packets before the data can
be delivered
On Feb 20, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Take a look at the level of packet fragmentation you are
encountering;
yes, this is expected and things will work but there is extra latency
added when the IP stack has to reassemble packets before the data can
be delivered. Try setting the
* Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080220 10:35] wrote:
> Hi--
>
> On Feb 20, 2008, at 3:23 AM, Valerio Daelli wrote:
> > 99904 total packets received
> [ ... ]
> >
> > 61441 fragments received
>
> [ ... ]
> > 34819 output datagrams fragmented
> > 208914 fragments created
>
> Ta
Hi--
On Feb 20, 2008, at 3:23 AM, Valerio Daelli wrote:
99904 total packets received
[ ... ]
61441 fragments received
[ ... ]
34819 output datagrams fragmented
208914 fragments created
Take a look at the level of packet fragmentation you are encountering;
In response to Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Bill Moran wrote:
> > In response to Brett Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before)
> >> network errors, serious response time errors and generally poor
> >> performance during peak activity (s
Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Brett Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before)
>> network errors, serious response time errors and generally poor
>> performance during peak activity (same box, same people).
>
> IIRC, signal 6 is an indicator
Claus Guttesen wrote:
we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
We have tried both UDP and TCP mounts, both sync and async.
This is our mount:
nest.xx.xx:/data/export/hosts/bsd7.xx.xx/ /mnt/n
Valerio Daelli wrote:
On Feb 19, 2008 8:53 PM, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Valerio Daelli wrote:
Hi list
we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
We have tried both UDP and TC
> > we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
> > It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
> > We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
> > We have tried both UDP and TCP mounts, both sync and async.
> > This is our mount:
> >
> > nest.xx.xx:/data/export/hosts/bsd7.xx.xx/ /mn
On Feb 19, 2008 8:53 PM, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Valerio Daelli wrote:
> > Hi list
> >
> > we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
> > It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
> > We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
> > We have tried both UDP and T
12 matches
Mail list logo
