:>
:>
:> To get a priority inversion like this one needs at least three tasks
:> with different priorities.
:
:Ah, yes. I stand corrected :)
:
:Thanks,
:-jj
Right, you need three tasks, but one of them has absolutely nothing to
do with the process holding the resource or the processin
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Stanley Hopcroft wrote:
> Copying zone files from the master to the secondary; the problem servers
> are secondaries.
How many zones are you talking about? named does not need to open
a file descriptor for every single zone file for the whole life of the
daemon.
> >
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your reply.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 08:39:21PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> This would actually be better on freebsd-stable, for future
> reference.
>
>
> What do you mean by replication?
Copying zone files from the master to the secondary; the problem serve
I had a shutdown issue as well, come to think of it. I didn't have any page
faults, but I didn't do much with the system other than some basic tests of
the card. Does this driver have a maintainer? Any volunteers?
JN
- Original Message -
From: "Karl Heller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jo
On Thursday, 25 April 2002 at 23:18:34 +1000, Darren Reed wrote:
>
> Can someone explain why when I use gdb under FreeBSD 4.5, I cannot open
> files on an NFS partition that I can outside of gdb ?
>
> ie. i can do:
>
> $ wc Makefile
>
> but I cannot do:
>
> $ gdb `which wc`
> (gdb) run Makefile
>
Mike Meyer wrote:
> Well, I handle my own mail, and *I* certainly got it. I even chmod'ed
> /usr/bin/keyinit to close the known hole this bug created.
This just occurred to me -- it isn't possible that this is being
routed through an MTA whose A and PTR records don't match, is it?
To Unsubscri
Mike Meyer wrote:
> Well, I handle my own mail, and *I* certainly got it. I even chmod'ed
> /usr/bin/keyinit to close the known hole this bug created.
I handle my own mail and didn't receive it. Isn't in the mailing
list archive, either.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "un
In <057a01c1ecb7$7a0e1c80$b9e2910c@daleco>, Kevin Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> My wife files my email, so I can't say with
> surety, but I don't recall seeing the SA on stdio
> either. I've grepped for the headers and found
> several (zlib, squid, openssh) but not this o
My wife files my email, so I can't say with
surety, but I don't recall seeing the SA on stdio
either. I've grepped for the headers and found
several (zlib, squid, openssh) but not this one.
Fortunately, the volume of mail on the topic
has given me pause to take notice.
Kevin Kinsey, DaleCo,
> Almost, but not quite. In your scenario the low-priority task would
> get to run since the high-priority task is blocked and would thus
> eventually release the resource. No deadlock, no problem.
>
> The classic priority inversion that I have heard about is the following
> scenario:
>
> Three
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 03:31:21PM -0700, JJ Behrens wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> > The classic priority inversion problem occurs when you have a low
> > priority process blocked on I/O and a higher priority process
> > monopolizing the cpu. Even though the lower priority process is
> >
11 matches
Mail list logo
