Hi.
Kris Kennaway wrote:
CPU states: 9.5% user, 0.0% nice, 82.0% system, 0.5% interrupt,
8.0% idle
A wild idea that might not help: try reducing kern.hz in loader.conf to
something like 100 and see if something significant changes.
Now it runs with hz=100, number of context switches became
Hi,
I'm experiencing strange problem with PE2850 - CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(TM)
CPU 3.20GHz (3192.23-MHz K8-class CPU)
It's a dual processor (with HT) server and worked very well with freebsd
6.2,
before few days I updated one of ours pe2850 to see how will 6.3
perform, and the first think that I no
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 07:53:34AM +0100, Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 09:21:42PM +0100, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
>
> > I'm positively sure it's precisely this value that timeouts this
> > conection (which later on get state mismatches).
>
> What does pfctl -vvss show for such a
Alexey Popov wrote:
Hi.
Kris Kennaway wrote:
CPU states: 9.5% user, 0.0% nice, 82.0% system, 0.5% interrupt,
8.0% idle
A wild idea that might not help: try reducing kern.hz in loader.conf to
something like 100 and see if something significant changes.
Now it runs with hz=100, number of co
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 10:50:41AM +0100, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
> And the state becomes:
>
> self tcp MY_IP_HERE:12525 <- MY_IP_HERE:64829 ESTABLISHED:FIN_WAIT_2
>[390096685 + 66608] wscale 1 [3173294128 + 66608] wscale 1
>age 00:00:04, expires in 00:00:05, 4:3 pkts, 441:168 bytes,
The specific change in the OpenBSD tree was
Revision 1.494
Mon Jul 4 08:28:04 2005 UTC (2 years, 4 months ago) by markus
Branch: MAIN
Changes since 1.493: +3 -3 lines
restrict the tcp.finwait timeout (45s) to state combinations where we have
seen a FIN from both sides (whether ACKed or not) and u
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 11:20:56AM +0100, Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 10:50:41AM +0100, Jan Srzednicki wrote:
>
> Note the slight difference, which explains your observations.
>
> It looks like this change was never backported/merged to RELENG_6.
>
> Try the newer (first) v
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:09:33 +0100, Stefan Lambrev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm experiencing strange problem with PE2850 - CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(TM)
CPU 3.20GHz (3192.23-MHz K8-class CPU)
It's a dual processor (with HT) server and worked very well with freebsd
6.2,
before few days I up
Hi
Kris Kennaway wrote:
CPU states: 9.5% user, 0.0% nice, 82.0% system, 0.5%
interrupt, 8.0% idle
A wild idea that might not help: try reducing kern.hz in
loader.conf to
something like 100 and see if something significant changes.
Usually on PHP backends slow PHP code eats most of the CPU
Hi Alexey,
Can you please send and dmesg from FreeBSD 7 on this server?
As I'm little puzzled what you mean by 7-stable :)
Alexey Popov wrote:
Hi.
I have a large pool of web backends (Apache + mod_php5) with
2 x Xeon 3.2GHz processors and 2 x Xeon 5120 dual-core processors. The
workload is mo
Hi.
Ivan Voras wrote:
Some more ideas: How is your disk load (iostat, systat -vm, diskinfo -t)
during the load? You don't use NFS for the web directories, do you?
Can you run bonnie++ while the machine is idle (i.e. apache is stopped)
just to verify it isn't a stupid problem with the disks or th
Hi,
Ronald Klop wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:09:33 +0100, Stefan Lambrev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm experiencing strange problem with PE2850 - CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(TM)
CPU 3.20GHz (3192.23-MHz K8-class CPU)
It's a dual processor (with HT) server and worked very well with
freebsd 6.2
I've CVSup'd my RELENG_6 source and tried a make buildworld. Compilation
breaks with the following error:
===> sbin/ipf/libipf (depend)
make: don't know how to make extras.c. Stop
*** Error code 2
I noticed there was another post with this same problem at
http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 01:15:56PM +0100, Karl M. Joch wrote:
Karl,
> i have searched alot for a software to:
>
> - distribut configuration files from one master to different systems
> - maintain configuration files on one machine for all systemes and then send
> it out
> - push the files, not d
Hello,
i have searched alot for a software to:
- distribut configuration files from one master to different systems
- maintain configuration files on one machine for all systemes and then send
it out
- push the files, not download them like cvsup
- maintaining files for all systems and files only
Karl M. Joch wrote:
Hello,
i have searched alot for a software to:
- distribut configuration files from one master to different systems
- maintain configuration files on one machine for all systemes and then send
it out
- push the files, not download them like cvsup
- maintaining files for all
Michael Eubanks escribió:
I've CVSup'd my RELENG_6 source and tried a make buildworld. Compilation
breaks with the following error:
===> sbin/ipf/libipf (depend)
make: don't know how to make extras.c. Stop
*** Error code 2
I noticed there was another post with this same problem at
http://unix.
On Nov 18, 2007 4:59 PM, Michael Eubanks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've CVSup'd my RELENG_6 source and tried a make buildworld. Compilation
> breaks with the following error:
>
> ===> sbin/ipf/libipf (depend)
> make: don't know how to make extras.c. Stop
> *** Error code 2
>
> I noticed there w
Hi.
Ivan Voras wrote:
> Many people (including me) have run FreeBSD on machines like yours
without such problems, so let's dig further.
You don't have WITNESS, INVARIANTS, DIAGNOSTICS or something similar
enabled? Can you try a generic SMP kernel (called "SMP" in 6.x; the
"GENERIC" in 7.x has
On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 19:27 +0300, Alexey Popov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> After that I rebuilt with SMP GENERIC kernel and put on that server 2
> times more requests that UP could handle. For the first time it worked
> good. Then I increased load to 2.5 times more than UP. Immediately
> Apache child cou
On 20/11/2007, Alexey Popov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CPU states: 5.9% user, 0.0% nice, 81.3% system, 0.0% interrupt, 12.8% idle
> CPU states: 82.2% user, 0.0% nice, 13.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 4.0% idle
Interesting coincidence: 1 CPU generates almost 8x less "sys time" then 8 CPUs.
B
> Thank you for your research. I think you can get more %sys with 4-core
> processors. For me 2xquad-core systems are now completely unusable as
> PHP backends.
I am getting very alarmed by this discussion as we just took delivery
of ten 2x quad core systems to be deployes as heavy webservers in
Hi.
Ivan Voras wrote:
CPU states: 5.9% user, 0.0% nice, 81.3% system, 0.0% interrupt, 12.8% idle
CPU states: 82.2% user, 0.0% nice, 13.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 4.0% idle
Interesting coincidence: 1 CPU generates almost 8x less "sys time" then 8 CPUs.
But it seems that you have found some
Hi.
Tom Evans wrote:
After that I rebuilt with SMP GENERIC kernel and put on that server 2
times more requests that UP could handle. For the first time it worked
good. Then I increased load to 2.5 times more than UP. Immediately
Apache child count increased to MaxClients (24), most of them in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Karl M. Joch wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i have searched alot for a software to:
>
> - distribut configuration files from one master to different
> systems - maintain configuration files on one machine for all
> systemes and then send it out - push the files,
> > Thank you for your research. I think you can get more %sys with 4-core
> > processors. For me 2xquad-core systems are now completely unusable as
> > PHP backends.
>
> I am getting very alarmed by this discussion as we just took delivery
> of ten 2x quad core systems to be deployes as heavy webs
Claus Guttesen wrote:
> I'm running two DL360 G5 webservers each with two quad-core cpu's.
> Each have 8 GB of ram, one is 2 Ghz and the other is 2.33 Ghz. They
> run just fine. These two webservers have twice the weight of three
> opterons with two dual-core cpu's on our coyote load-balancer.
Th
Alexey Popov wrote:
Hi
Kris Kennaway wrote:
CPU states: 9.5% user, 0.0% nice, 82.0% system, 0.5%
interrupt, 8.0% idle
A wild idea that might not help: try reducing kern.hz in
loader.conf to
something like 100 and see if something significant changes.
Usually on PHP backends slow PHP code
Kris Kennaway wrote:
In the meantime there is unfortunately not a lot that can be done,
AFAICT. There is one hack that I will send you later but it is not
likely to help much. I will also think about how to track down the
cause of the contention further (the profiling trace only shows that it
Hi all.
I have a problem with natd, I think. I'm using FreeBSD 6.2 as a
router/proxy at home.
Sometimes (weeks apart) I've noticed that it's quite impossible to surf.
Connections timeout. A continuous ping from the router to an outside
address reveals a packet loss of more than 50%. After some
Bob Bishop wrote:
Hi,
FWIW, we are seeing 2 x quad-core 2.66GHz outperform (per core) 2 x
dual-core 3GHz on the same type of m/b, apparently because of better
bandwidth to memory. However, this is on a compute-intensive workload
running 1 job per core so would be pretty insensitive to
schedu
> > FWIW, we are seeing 2 x quad-core 2.66GHz outperform (per core) 2 x
> > dual-core 3GHz on the same type of m/b, apparently because of better
> > bandwidth to memory. However, this is on a compute-intensive workload
> > running 1 job per core so would be pretty insensitive to
> > scheduler/locki
Claus Guttesen wrote:
FWIW, we are seeing 2 x quad-core 2.66GHz outperform (per core) 2 x
dual-core 3GHz on the same type of m/b, apparently because of better
bandwidth to memory. However, this is on a compute-intensive workload
running 1 job per core so would be pretty insensitive to
scheduler/l
> The issue in this thread is not if they are fast, but could they be made
> faster by shortening sys time :)
Yes, I'm aware of that. :-) The comment was related to the former mail
where some uncertainty came along when he read this thread.
> (btw. what is your sys time under stress?)
I'll take
Hi,
FWIW, we are seeing 2 x quad-core 2.66GHz outperform (per core) 2 x
dual-core 3GHz on the same type of m/b, apparently because of better
bandwidth to memory. However, this is on a compute-intensive workload
running 1 job per core so would be pretty insensitive to scheduler/
locking iss
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
In the meantime there is unfortunately not a lot that can be done,
AFAICT. There is one hack that I will send you later but it is not
likely to help much. I will also think about how to track down the
cause of the contention further (the profiling tr
Hi,
I am not 100% sure, maybe I overlook something in binary major version
upgrade procedure, but after upgrade from 6.2 to 7.0-BETA3 my roots
~/.cshrc was "accidentally" replaced with dist version of .cshrc and
/etc/pf.conf is missing.
It was on testing machine, so no problem (restored from
> Karl M. Joch wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > i have searched alot for a software to:
> >
> > - distribut configuration files from one master to different
> > systems - maintain configuration files on one machine for all
> > systemes and then send it out - push the files, not download them
> > like cvsu
On Nov 20, 2007 3:15 PM, Julian H. Stacey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Karl M. Joch wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > i have searched alot for a software to:
> > >
> > > - distribut configuration files from one master to different
> > > systems - maintain configuration files on one machine for all
Hello,
Just an FYI, http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.3R/schedule.html returns
a 404. This is linked from http://www.freebsd.org/releases/.
Thanks.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
T
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 12:15:36AM +0100, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Add
> PermitRootLogin yes
> to
> /etc/ssh/sshd_config
This should really be "PermitRootLogin without-password". Yes, the
phrase "without-password" looks scary, but it isn't so much -- it allows
root login via password
Hello.
On 21/11/2007, Miroslav Lachman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am not 100% sure, maybe I overlook something in binary major version
> upgrade procedure, but after upgrade from 6.2 to 7.0-BETA3 my roots
> ~/.cshrc was "accidentally" replaced with dist version of .cshrc and
It could h
On Nov 21, 2007 8:20 AM, Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 12:15:36AM +0100, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > Add
> > PermitRootLogin yes
> > to
> > /etc/ssh/sshd_config
>
> This should really be "PermitRootLogin without-password". Yes, the
> phrase "witho
43 matches
Mail list logo
