Hi on 3 different servers we had the same pronlem as below.
2 servers 6.1-STABLE and one 6.1-RELEASE security branch.
2 of the servers before hand were running without nfs and geli for
months stable, the 3rd was brand new.
We enabled geli encryption on loopback partitions and real partitions
to
In the last episode (Aug 17), Alan Amesbury said:
> OK, booting *too* quickly is a somewhat unusual problem. I have
> FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p3 running on a Dell PowerEdge 850. For some
> reason, in the PowerEdge 850 Dell chose to replace the perfectly
> adequate em(4) adapters found on the PE75
OK, booting *too* quickly is a somewhat unusual problem. I have
FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p3 running on a Dell PowerEdge 850. For some
reason, in the PowerEdge 850 Dell chose to replace the perfectly
adequate em(4) adapters found on the PE750 with bge(4) hardware.
FreeBSD identifies these adapters
Update:
We reverted to freevrrpd 0.8.7 which seems to work.
Steve
Stephen Clark wrote:
Hello list,
We have been running 4.9 and using freevrrpd 0.9.3, which worked great,
- the latest in the ports tree. We are switching
to 6.1 released and we now get the the following error from freevrrpd:
f
> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:32:00 -0400
> From: Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --9amGYk9869ThD9tj
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 07:27:40PM +
Thanks, Kris. I guess its time for me to go shopping for some new hardware.
Peter
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:24:48PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 17 August 2006 04:20, Peter van Heusden wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the advice John. I upgraded to 6-STABLE
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Aug 17), Brent Casavant said:
> > Note that IRIX's top does not bias for availabile CPUs -- I've seen
> > well-threaded programs using in excess of 2400% CPU.
> >
> > What it comes down to is that depending on the nature of the
> > inf
In the last episode (Aug 17), Brent Casavant said:
> Note that IRIX's top does not bias for availabile CPUs -- I've seen
> well-threaded programs using in excess of 2400% CPU.
>
> What it comes down to is that depending on the nature of the
> information you're trying to glean from WCPU, you may w
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:24:48PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday 17 August 2006 04:20, Peter van Heusden wrote:
> > Thanks for the advice John. I upgraded to 6-STABLE and just got a kernel
> > panic again. Before I list the dump, I'd like to mention two messages I
> > see in my syslog. F
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:10:49PM +0200, Tom Hummel wrote:
> > bash is still the problem somehow, as you can see since it's the
> > process sitting waiting for input.
>
> shouldn't 'make buildenv' solve this?
I don't know if "fixing your broken shell" is within its list of powers
:-)
Kris
pgp
Greetings all --
I'm running FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE on i386 with a stock kernel, and am
trying to build a 4 disk RAID5 array using vinum. The issue is that,
once the system is rebooted after initially creating the array, the
subdisks come up as stale.
I first started by creating a 4 subdisk ar
On Thursday 17 August 2006 04:20, Peter van Heusden wrote:
> Thanks for the advice John. I upgraded to 6-STABLE and just got a kernel
> panic again. Before I list the dump, I'd like to mention two messages I
> see in my syslog. Firstly, often I get something like this:
>
> kernel: swap_pager: inde
> bash is still the problem somehow, as you can see since it's the
> process sitting waiting for input.
shouldn't 'make buildenv' solve this?
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscr
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 07:27:40PM +0200, Tom Hummel wrote:
> > Why was zsh also running on that tty?
>
> invoked in manually, makes no difference, outcome is the same.
bash is still the problem somehow, as you can see since it's the
process sitting waiting for input.
Kris
pgpXLvFn7rgWN.pgp
De
> Why was zsh also running on that tty?
invoked in manually, makes no difference, outcome is the same.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:28 PM, Bill LeFebvre wrote:
> > > > You have multiple CPUs, so a threaded process can theoretically reach
> > > > 100*ncpus cpu usage.
> > > >
> > > Ahh, thats makes sense, thanks.
> >
> > Actually it doesn't. IMO, %CPU should be
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:17:34PM +0200, Tom Hummel wrote:
> > Where did bash come from? It's not part of FreeBSD; I guess you
> > somehow replaced /bin/sh with bash.
>
> gosh, no.
> Bash should be located in /usr/local/bin/ and I invoke it at login for
> root in chase of an interactive session
On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:28 PM, Bill LeFebvre wrote:
You have multiple CPUs, so a threaded process can theoretically
reach
100*ncpus cpu usage.
Ahh, thats makes sense, thanks.
Actually it doesn't. IMO, %CPU should be biased for all available
cpu, not just a single cpu. In other words, a s
Bill LeFebvre wrote:
O. Hartmann wrote:
I use FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE/AMD on an pure 64Bit box/environment, single
CPU Athlon 3500+, and sometimes I can see a 100%+ usage of WCPU in
'xine' or 'transmission'. So this is definitely not related to
multiple CPUs.
WCPU is supposed to be weighted in so
> Where did bash come from? It's not part of FreeBSD; I guess you
> somehow replaced /bin/sh with bash.
gosh, no.
Bash should be located in /usr/local/bin/ and I invoke it at login for
root in chase of an interactive session through ~/.cshrc. I didn't want
to change root's login shell into someth
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:06:29PM +0200, Tom Hummel wrote:
> > You have no output at all? What commands are running (check via ps)?
> > What does ^T report at the command line running make?
>
> goes as follows
>
> ^T: load: 0.01 cmd: bash 673 [ttyin] 0.00u 0.00s 0% 1908k
Where did bash come f
Dan Nelson wrote:
One problem is that method doesn't scale to lots of CPUs. On a Sun
T2000 a non-threaded process consuming all of one CPU would only report
3.12 %CPU in that case (100/32).
I agree. The alternative is having a 10-thread process on such a system
report 1000% cpu utilization,
In the last episode (Aug 17), Bill LeFebvre said:
> Mike Jakubik wrote:
> >Dan Nelson wrote:
> >>>How can mysql use 160%? Is this a reporting bug in top because mysql
> >>>is threaded?
> >>You have multiple CPUs, so a threaded process can theoretically reach
> >>100*ncpus cpu usage.
> >
> >Ahh, th
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 03:35:14AM -1000, Antony Mawer wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> A quick question - is it recommended to initialise disks before using
> them to allow the disks to map out any "bad spots" early on? I've seen
> some "uninitialised" disks (ie. new disks, thrown into a machine,
> newfs
Hello list,
We have been running 4.9 and using freevrrpd 0.9.3, which worked great,
- the latest in the ports tree. We are switching
to 6.1 released and we now get the the following error from freevrrpd:
freevrrpd[6241]: cannot do ioctl, intertface is faulty: Device not
configured
This is a bogu
> You have no output at all? What commands are running (check via ps)?
> What does ^T report at the command line running make?
goes as follows
^T: load: 0.01 cmd: bash 673 [ttyin] 0.00u 0.00s 0% 1908k
ps -h -t v0:
PID TT STAT TIME COMMAND
533 v0 Is 0:00.02 login [pam] (login)
541
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:16:51AM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 03:59:13PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:49:27AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:15:25PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:58:
Hi list,
A quick question - is it recommended to initialise disks before using
them to allow the disks to map out any "bad spots" early on? I've seen
some "uninitialised" disks (ie. new disks, thrown into a machine,
newfs'd) start to show read errors within a few months of deployment,
which I
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:21:10PM +0200, Tom Hummel wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> a recent test-install of OBSD somehow destroyed parts of my FBSD
> installation so I was forced to reinstall, which wasn't so much of a
> problem since my ~ partition was still fine.
>
> However since the new installation
Hi list,
a recent test-install of OBSD somehow destroyed parts of my FBSD
installation so I was forced to reinstall, which wasn't so much of a
problem since my ~ partition was still fine.
However since the new installation of FBSD6_1 a 'make buildworld' in a
freshly csup'ed /usr/src of RELENG_6 d
Thanks for the advice John. I upgraded to 6-STABLE and just got a kernel
panic again. Before I list the dump, I'd like to mention two messages I
see in my syslog. Firstly, often I get something like this:
kernel: swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 151698,
size: 28672
(though th
Hi,
I have an Asus A8V with AMD64 3200+, and a Promise TX2300 RAID card and I have
configured two WD 320Gb disks in RAID 1. I have been testing RAID recovery and
have noticed that I get timeouts when rebuilding the array (but not if I just
read /dev/ar0 normally).
Here's part of dmesg..
...
ata
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 03:59:13PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:49:27AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:15:25PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:58:44PM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:54:
33 matches
Mail list logo
