On 7/21/2010 11:39 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Adam Vande More mailto:amvandem...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Also if you have an applicable SATA controller, running the ahci module
with give you more speed. Only change one thing a time though.
Virtualbox makes a great
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
> I hope my terminology is correct
>
> I have a ZFS array which uses raw devices. I'd rather it use glabel and
> supply the GEOM devices to ZFS instead. In addition, I'll also partition
> the HDD to avoid using the entire HDD: leave a lit
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
>
> -Does it only affect the new drives with 4K blocks?
>
No, although blocksize does effect these symptoms
> -If it does not, is it generally good to start your first partition at 1MB
> in? How exactly does doing this "fix" the align
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
the first 33 LBA are used for. It's not for us to use here.
Where SOMEVALUE is the num
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
>
>> Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
>> the first 33 LBA are used for. It's not for us to use here.
>
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
> Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
> the first 33 LBA are used for. It's not for us to use here.
>
> Where SOMEVALUE is the number of blocks to use. I plan not to us
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
>> glabel label -v disk00 /dev/ad0
>
> Or, is this more appropriate?
>
> glabel label -v disk00 /dev/ad0s1
>
actually it's /dev/ad0p1.
GPT scheme uses p, not s. And yes, that's more appropriate - if you
create zpool on disk00 labeled as ad0
On 7/21/2010 11:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote (something close to this):
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition scheme on the HDD:
gpart create -s GPT ad0
Let's see how much space we have. This output will be used to determine
SOMEVALUE in the next command.
gpart show
Create a new
I hope my terminology is correct
I have a ZFS array which uses raw devices. I'd rather it use glabel and
supply the GEOM devices to ZFS instead. In addition, I'll also
partition the HDD to avoid using the entire HDD: leave a little bit of
space at the start and end.
Why use glabel?
*
I noticed on a recent RELENG_8 box, the CPU became pegged. Looking
at top, it has something to do with flowtables
last pid: 49269; load
averages: 2.76, 2.29, 2.07
up 18+09:36:04 21:42:07
89 processes: 6 running, 70 sleeping, 13 waiting
CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 50.0% s
TB --- 2010-07-22 00:04:59 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-07-22 00:04:59 - starting RELENG_8_0 tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2010-07-22 00:04:59 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-07-22 00:05:19 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-07-22 00:05:19 - /usr
On 7/19/2010 10:50 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
I think it's because you pull the old drive, boot with the new drive,
the controller re-numbers all the devices (ie da3 is now da2, da2 is
now da1, da1 is now da0, da0 is now da6, etc), and ZFS
This is probably a stupid question, but I haven't received any csup
updates for a couple of days now, even though I've seen quite a few
commits on the list. I'm using the cvs tag=RELENG_8
I've tried both cvsup4.freebsd.org and cvsup10.freebsd.org (my two
fastest connections).
Are the mirrors jus
Hi Sergey,
I'm dumbstruck!
Switching 'ip' to 'ip4' in both the divert rules fixed my problem.
Personally I think that should go into the UPDATING file as well. I
wouldn't have found it if you hadn't told me!
Many thanks,
Spil.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Spil Oss wrote:
> Hi Sergey,
>
>
Hi Sergey,
Has the change from ip to ip4 solved the problem for you? The
documentation states that proto 'ip' is the same as 'all' "Matches any
packet."
Rule # 60
$cmd 060 skipto 1000 ip6 from any to any
will have already skipped to the ipv6 rules block thus proto 'ip'
should always match re
Ok, I found the culprit. If I do "ifconfig ix2 -rxcsum" the packet loss
disappear.
Still strange that it did not affect packets going to user-level.
John
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 02:15:14PM +0200, John Hay wrote:
>
> Ok, after some more testing, I found that it was not only with ipv6 that
> I h
On Wednesday, July 21, 2010 12:44:49 pm Markus Gebert wrote:
>
> On 21.07.2010, at 14:36, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> > on 21/07/2010 15:25 Markus Gebert said the following:
> >> On 21.07.2010, at 10:33, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >>
> >>> on 21/07/2010 03:57 Markus Gebert said the following:
> Anot
On Wednesday, July 21, 2010 5:17:06 am Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/07/2010 11:33 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> > Not sure how to interpret this properly.
> > One possibility is a hardware problem where interrupt message route
between
> > ioapic2 and CPU to which lapic3 belongs is flaky.
>
>
On Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:57:07 pm Markus Gebert wrote:
>
> On 20.07.2010, at 21:59, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> >> I started narrowing the revisions down until I
> >> found out, that while on r202386 I'm still able to trigger the MCE,
r202387
> >> seems to solve the problem on CURRENT:
> >>
>
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 07:50:53PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/07/2010 19:44 Markus Gebert said the following:
> > 1271: 92146 45282139 9 4885 PCI-MSI-edge ioc0
> ...
> > Not sure how to interpret this. At first sight no IRQ58, but I guess they
> > might
> > be
on 21/07/2010 19:44 Markus Gebert said the following:
> 1271: 92146 45282139 9 4885 PCI-MSI-edge ioc0
...
> Not sure how to interpret this. At first sight no IRQ58, but I guess they
> might
> be using MSI for mpt, which might avoid the problem entirely.
Yep, looks lik
On 21.07.2010, at 14:36, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/07/2010 15:25 Markus Gebert said the following:
>> On 21.07.2010, at 10:33, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>>> on 21/07/2010 03:57 Markus Gebert said the following:
Another thing though: Today I compared verbose boot output from 8-stable
and
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
> Two things:
>
> -What's the preferred labelling method for disks that will be used with zfs
> these days? geom_label or gpt labels? I've been using the latter and I
> find them a little simpler.
If the disks will only be used in FreeB
Hello Spill,
I have get the same trouble after updating my 8.0 Stable. I thing you need
modify some firewall rules.
Please change
$cmd 100 divert natd ip from any to any in via $pif # Mangle inbound
to
$cmd 100 divert natd ip4 from any to any in via $pif # Mangle inbound
and
$cmd 500 divert n
on 21/07/2010 15:25 Markus Gebert said the following:
> On 21.07.2010, at 10:33, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
>> on 21/07/2010 03:57 Markus Gebert said the following:
>>> Another thing though: Today I compared verbose boot output from 8-stable
>>> and the current box. I saw that the ioapic sets up IRQ ro
On 21.07.2010, at 10:33, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/07/2010 03:57 Markus Gebert said the following:
>> Another thing though: Today I compared verbose boot output from 8-stable and
>> the current box. I saw that the ioapic sets up IRQ routing differently on
>> these two systems although the hardw
Ok, after some more testing, I found that it was not only with ipv6 that
I had packet loss. Routing either ipv4 or ipv6 had some loss.
My test setup is the Dell T710 with its ix2 connected to a 10G port of
a Nortel 4526GTX. On that port I have 2 vlans configured with half of
the 1G ports in the o
On 7/21/2010 2:54 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010, alan bryan wrote:
--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Dan Langille wrote:
From: Dan Langille
Subject: Re: Problems replacing failing drive in ZFS pool
To: "Freddie Cash"
Cc: "freebsd-stab
Hi,
Testing FreeBSD 8.1 I noticed that I seem to have routing or nat or
firewall issues. (csupped RELENG_8_1 which was -RELEASE not -RC last
night?)
- 8.1 booted fine
- connections from the system itself were fine
- connections from my jails to the internet were not working
- connections from my L
on 21/07/2010 11:33 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> Not sure how to interpret this properly.
> One possibility is a hardware problem where interrupt message route between
> ioapic2 and CPU to which lapic3 belongs is flaky.
Or, I/O path between that CPU and the PCI slot where the device resides.
on 21/07/2010 03:57 Markus Gebert said the following:
> Another thing though: Today I compared verbose boot output from 8-stable and
> the current box. I saw that the ioapic sets up IRQ routing differently on
> these two systems although the hardware is the same. This seemed not so
> interesting at
31 matches
Mail list logo
