Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020420 16:01] wrote: > > > > > > As a quick follow-up to this, doing more searching on the web, I came > > across a few suggested 'sysctl' settings, which I've added to what I had > > before, for a total of: >

Re: /etc/defaults/rc.conf theory

2002-04-20 Thread D J Hawkey Jr
On Apr 20, at 02:59 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Jan Grant wrote: > > > On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Calvin NG wrote: > > > > > Greetings, > > > > > > I believe when people say copy rc.conf from /etc/defaults/ into > > > /etc/, and go throught it line by line, they really mean, >

Re: /etc/defaults/rc.conf theory

2002-04-20 Thread Andy Farkas
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Doug Barton wrote: > ... so the one left to discuss > is inetd. At this point changing the default back seems to be the most > reasonable course of action, even though everything in /etc/inetd.conf is > off by default. There is nothing to discuss. Leave everything off in /et

Re: /etc/defaults/rc.conf theory

2002-04-20 Thread Doug Barton
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Philip J. Koenig wrote: > My .02: > > There seems to be a few recent situations where fundamental changes > were made in a way that didn't easily slipstream into the stable > upgrading process. (ie sendmail changes and the new users necessary, > which bit me. I think the pro

Need to update rc.conf (Was: Re: *** HEAD'S UP ***)

2002-04-20 Thread Doug Barton
On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Andy Farkas wrote: > On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In short, I strongly disagree with "explicitly include your choices > > for anything that you care about, whether they are the defaults or not". > > I strongly disagree with your disagreement :) > > To me

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020420 16:01] wrote: > > > As a quick follow-up to this, doing more searching on the web, I came > across a few suggested 'sysctl' settings, which I've added to what I had > before, for a total of: > > kern.maxfiles=65534 > jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 > vm.sw

Re: checkout-date in kernel name

2002-04-20 Thread Andy Farkas
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Thomas Krause, CI wrote: > Hello, > > I want to have the checkout date in the kernel name, e.g. > > # uname -sr > FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE-20020418 > > instead of > > # uname -sr > FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE > > I've done this by patching /sys/conf/newvers.sh. Is there an easier way to > d

Re: *** HEAD'S UP ***

2002-04-20 Thread Andy Farkas
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In short, I strongly disagree with "explicitly include your choices > for anything that you care about, whether they are the defaults or not". I strongly disagree with your disagreement :) To me, it makes more sense explicitly include choices for a

Re: /etc/defaults/rc.conf theory

2002-04-20 Thread Philip J. Koenig
My .02: There seems to be a few recent situations where fundamental changes were made in a way that didn't easily slipstream into the stable upgrading process. (ie sendmail changes and the new users necessary, which bit me. I think the process of adding those users should have been either in

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
As a quick follow-up to this, doing more searching on the web, I came across a few suggested 'sysctl' settings, which I've added to what I had before, for a total of: kern.maxfiles=65534 jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 vm.swap_idle_enabled=1 vfs.vmiodirenable=1 kern.ipc.somaxconn=4096 I've also just re

Re: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Mike Grissom
If you are using 4.5 then you should probably use MAXUSERS 0 and remove the NMBCLUSTERS that enabled auto scalling and should up the NMBCLUSTERS and other sysctl parms when they are needed to be higher and it bases the settings on how much ram you have. - Original Message - From: "Marc G.

Re: *** HEAD'S UP ***

2002-04-20 Thread Doug Barton
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Doug White wrote: > On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Doug Barton wrote: > > > I highly recommend backing up your existing rc.conf[.local], and > > copying /etc/defaults/rc.conf to /etc/rc.conf. > > NO NO NO!! > > YOU WILL CRASH YOUR SYSTEM IF YOU COPY DEFAULTS/RC.CONF TO RC.CONF WITH

Re: Add note to UPDATING (was: Re: inetd_enable

2002-04-20 Thread Gregory Neil Shapiro
>> If sendmail_enable=NO, then the next one is sendmail_submit_enable which, >> by default, is YES. That one starts a daemon that only listens on >> localhost. See /etc/mail/README for more information. DougB> Well, I would have thought that this pretty well solves the DougB> majority of the pr

FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE not easily scalable to large servers ... ?

2002-04-20 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Over the past week, I've been trying to get information on how to fix a server that panics with: | panic: vm_map_entry_create: kernel resources exhausted | mp_lock = 0101; cpuid = 1; lapic.id = 0100 | boot() called on cpu#1 Great ... but, how do I determine what 'resources' I need to in