Many of us rarely use our @FreeBSD.org addresses; you'd probably be
surprised at the names in the Developers list.
Just being a committer gives your opinions very little weight; everyone has
to make their case in the same way. There's really, really no eliteism here!
Chris
_
h this? It has promise but needs some more people
involved.
> --
> Chris Brennan
> A: Yes.
> >Q: Are you sure?
> >>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> >>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
> http://xkcd.com/84/ | http://xkcd.com/149/ | htt
On 28 August 2011 19:47, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Sunday, August 28, 2011 a las 07:27:49PM +0100, Chris Rees escribió:
>
>> On 27 August 2011 20:32, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Hartmann, O.
>> > wrote:
>> >>
n.html
>
> Agreed. Things have changed quite a bit in the last decade.
It reads rather FUD-like too.
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any m
ers ?
Thanks.
Chris.
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
s you are seeing? top never gives you
an accurate snapshot of what the system is doing at any one instant in
time, afaik.
--
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
only? as that what it
feels like I am reading sometimes.
Now on the bind tests if the hardware used on both linux and freebsd
was the exact same spec hardware then blaming the hardware is invalid
as its apple vs apple. Obviously if the linux tests were done on
superior hardware then its apple vs or
On 01/03/2008, Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 01/03/2008, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > You working round what I just said. A nic should perform equally well
> > as it does in other operating systems just because its cheaper its not
> &
On 29/02/2008, Tom Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 15:44 +0000, Chris wrote:
> > On 29/02/2008, Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > A weakness of freebsd is its fussyness over hardware in particular
> > network card
ters who didn't do this. In fact as I recall the impetus
> for fixing the
> extended greater than 16MB memory test was due to a
> slam in a trade rag from a tester who didn't bother
> recompiling the FreeBSD kernel to recognize the complete
> amount of ram in the server, a
to get over 950Mbps throughput. Sorry I don't have my
sysctl.conf settings, that box was reallocated after we replaced it
with some Cisco junk.
-Chris
On Tue, Feb 5, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Bc. Radek Krejca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have FreeBSD box as router
> Fre
is slight improvements for UP also but all the machines can
get intterupts intensive, lots of high speed transfers using nic
interrupts. In this scenario am I better of using 4BSD?
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.fr
Hi.
I got a server that is primarily handling large files not massive
files but files that are 15meg+ in size and very few smaller files.
So I decided to use the following options in newfs.
-f 4096 -b 32768
Eventually I realised this was a bad decision especially when I
noticed vfs.bufdefragcnt
#x27;t done much in the way of
> network-related stress-testing, but I'm always looking for ways to do so.
>
>
--
Justin
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe,
___
I switched from the default timer to TSC on a dual xeon setup and my
loads instantly went up with mysql lagging, so in my case it was much
worse.
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
freebsd 4.x their is nothing to
dispute, its leaner and smoother on pretty much every UP setup and I
think it would do freebsd's reputation some good if a 4.12 was to come
about.
just my 2 pence worth.
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org maili
. g. due to "cheap" implementation of cache strategies) to
> utilize the FSB to the maximum?
I'd be tempted to blame the Via chipset.
--
Cheers, Chris Howells -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://chrishowells.co.uk, PGP ID: 0x33795A2C
KDE/Qt/C
On 04/01/06, Alexander Leidinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 01:28:07 +0000
> Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > have had mysql lockups until I tinkered with the threading settings.
> Libthr
> > is the good old threading routine from t
how
libthr was better then linuxthreads when in the 4.x days linuxthreads was
considered better.
I am confused now as their is very little documentation on this, google
throws up barely anything and my main concern is stability.
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
x8010d7000)
>
>
>
> Ok thanks just 2 more questions.
(a) if I build dynamic there is no performance penalty? since the Makefile
states build static for performance.
(b) I have no /etc/libmap.conf it doesnt exist, so if I just create one and
enter what you say it will work?
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ly slower (around 6%, IIRC). The theory is that
> jemalloc doesn't pad out allocations as much, so there is high potential
> for cache line sharing (and thus cache thrash) between CPUs.
>
> Scott
Guys how do I know which threading
which ones should I renice.
93898 p2 S 0:00.20 -su (bash)
25726 ?? Ss 0:03.04 /usr/local/sbin/sshd -u0
91543 ?? Ss 0:00.05 sshd: admin [priv] (sshd)
Chris
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
22 matches
Mail list logo
