--- "O. Hartmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Before digging into this problem deeper with benchmarks, could anyone
> explain why FreeBSD reaches this 33 MB/s limit (sounds like UDMA 33
> defaults, but on both boxes nForce4 and ICH5 controller are recognized
> and show up with SATA300 or SATA15
--- "Steven H. Baeighkley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These servers are running apache, perl, proftpd and php. One server is
> running 4.11 and is rocking the world, load is rarely above 1 and is
> regularly below .5. The other server is running 6.2 and regularly has
> load between 2 and 6 des
--- Patrick Proniewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've connected the em0 port of the freebsd box on a gigabit PCI-X NIC
> I have in the Mac, and given a second try to the "dd | nc" client/
> server bench: 103 MB/s. This is far better !
> Same setup with apache 1.3 on the mac, wget on the Freeb
--- Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2007, at 8:07 AM, R. B. Riddick wrote:
> > As the "OP" (what is that exactly? again an animal?) mentioned:
> > Apache performs
> > worse than scp.
>
> Quick testing suggests that an Apache child
--- Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> R. B. Riddick wrote:
> > We had that problem before: Some HTTP server implementations just dont
> > bring it... :-) thttpd is quite efficient, I have heard...
>
> This is a red herring. The OP reports he transfers a
--- Patrick Proniewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll give FTP a try, but I would like the network to be fast for
> every protocols. I'm planning to share data using NFS, WebDAV, or SMB
> (and scp occasionally), but I've still to choose and configure
> appropriate servers.
>
We had that p
--- Benjamin D Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have three SATA drives (750 GB Barracuda 7200) I'm trying to
> figureout the best raid configuration for this.
> I'm looking for great preformance but I also want to so if one of the
> drives dies. I can remove it and the other two will work fin
--- Greg 'groggy' Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 October 2006 at 23:05:32 -0800, R. B. Riddick wrote:
> > I did it that way in my graid5 class:
> > http://home.tiscali.de/cmdr_faako/geom_raid5.tbz
>
> I would have taken a look at it
--- Greg 'groggy' Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Sufficiently large data blocks" equates to several megabytes.
> Currently MAXPHYS, the largest transfer request that would get to the
> bio layer, is 131072 bytes. This would imply a stripe size of not
> more than 32 kB for a five disk array, w
--- Raymond Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Questions:
> Can VM_KMEM_SIZE_MAX be set manually with sysctl?
>
No, but you could set it with this procedure:
1. Insert the lines
vm.kmem_size=123456789
vm.kmem_size_max=1234567890
in
/boot/loader.conf
2. reboot
That should change those value
On Tuesday, 27 June 2006 at 10:18:47 +0800, leo huang wrote:
> And how I can confirm this?
>
You could do this test:
1. write some data with dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/a bs=1m count=100
2. then fsync /tmp/a
3. then listen to the hard disc
4. repeat it until u r sure, if the hard disc reacts on the fs
Hi boys and girls! *giggle*
I hope the following does not sound too much like the product of a bipolar
disorder of mine...
Some years ago (in or about in 1993) I heard, that there is a computer program,
that was able to produce some mathematical theorems out of axioms (even some
new, I think; but
12 matches
Mail list logo
