Re: Any success stories for HAST + ZFS?

2011-04-12 Thread Pete French
Everything is detected correctly, everything comes up correctly. See a new option (reload) in the RC script for hast. success story snipped same here - have patched the master databse achines, all came up fine, everything running erfectly, have flip-flopped between the two machines with no ill

Re: Network throughput: Never get more than 112MB/s über two NICs

2011-04-12 Thread Denny Schierz
hi, Am Montag, den 11.04.2011, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Denny Schierz: hi, Am 11.04.2011 um 20:06 schrieb Tim Daneliuk: Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of active-active ... just a thought... 150% sure. I used two dedicated NICs WITHOUT any

Latest STABLE appears to break IPv6 CARP (and other oddities)

2011-04-12 Thread Pete French
I updated to STABLE yesterday to get the net hast patches - all seemed fine, so I went round and upgraded all the machines. But since then have been fighting with some odd network issues - to the point where I have rolled back to an earlier kernel to fix them. The main issue for me appears to be

background fsck high load on 8.1

2011-04-12 Thread Sergi Seira
Hello, we've experienced that background fsck on 8.1 degrades server performance on a higher degree than in previous fbsd versions (6.3, 7.3; amd64). We've noticed it after upgrading - same hardware - to a 8.1-RELEASE. Now, performance of other services (i.e. apache, mysql) during a background

Re: Network throughput: Never get more than 112MB/s über two NICs

2011-04-12 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Apr 12), Denny Schierz said: Am Montag, den 11.04.2011, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Denny Schierz: Am 11.04.2011 um 20:06 schrieb Tim Daneliuk: Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of active-active ... just a thought... 150% sure. I used

Re: background fsck high load on 8.1

2011-04-12 Thread Steven Hartland
The cpu requirements are usually quite low for fsck, what your most likely seeing is disk contention due to the amount of IO. Personally I would recommend to consider moving to 8.2 + ZFS as our filing system as it removes fsck from the equation, as well as giving lots of other benefits.

Re: powerd / cpufreq question

2011-04-12 Thread Ian Smith
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Daniel Gerzo wrote: On 11.4.2011 6:08, Ian Smith wrote: As you see, total of differences for each cpu is here 89 ticks, but I've no idea of the interval between your two readings, or your value of HZ? the interval may have been around 1-2 seconds. My value

Re: Network throughput: Never get more than 112MB/s über two NICs

2011-04-12 Thread Ulrich Spörlein
On Mon, 11.04.2011 at 12:00:39 +0200, Denny Schierz wrote: hi, after testing severals loadbalancing (LACP) types with Cisco, we saw, that we never get more than 112MB/s with two network cards and iperf. So, we tested without loadbalancing, 4 Clients (iperf -f M -c ip) and two target IPs.

Re: powerd / cpufreq question

2011-04-12 Thread Alexander Motin
Ian Smith wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Daniel Gerzo wrote: On 11.4.2011 6:08, Ian Smith wrote: As you see, total of differences for each cpu is here 89 ticks, but I've no idea of the interval between your two readings, or your value of HZ? the interval may have been around

Missing serial port after enabling serial console in loader.conf

2011-04-12 Thread Przemyslaw Frasunek
Hello, I'm struggling with enabling serial console on Intel SR1630GP server platform and FreeBSD 7.4. In default configuration, my serial ports are detected correctly: sio0: 16550A-compatible COM port port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on acpi0 sio0: type 16550A sio0: [FILTER] sio1:

Re: Network throughput: Never get more than 112MB/s über two NICs

2011-04-12 Thread Andrew Thompson
On 11 April 2011 22:00, Denny Schierz linuxm...@4lin.net wrote: hi, after testing severals loadbalancing (LACP) types with Cisco, we saw, that we never get more than 112MB/s with two network cards and iperf. So, we tested without loadbalancing, 4 Clients (iperf -f M -c ip) and two target

Re: Missing serial port after enabling serial console in loader.conf

2011-04-12 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 09:35:11PM +0200, Przemyslaw Frasunek wrote: Hello, I'm struggling with enabling serial console on Intel SR1630GP server platform and FreeBSD 7.4. In default configuration, my serial ports are detected correctly: sio0: 16550A-compatible COM port port 0x3f8-0x3ff

Re: Missing serial port after enabling serial console in loader.conf

2011-04-12 Thread Freddie Cash
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote: P.S. -- What's BMC stand for? Baseband Management Controller. It's the separate NIC (sometimes it's piggy-backed on a NIC) used for remote management of motherboards. Usually includes IPMI support. Depending on

Re: Missing serial port after enabling serial console in loader.conf

2011-04-12 Thread Pawel Tyll
Hi, P.S. -- What's BMC stand for? Baseband Management Controller. It's the separate NIC (sometimes it's piggy-backed on a NIC) used for remote management of motherboards. Usually includes IPMI support. Depending on the motherboard, it may even include support for keyboard/video/mouse

Re: Network throughput: Never get more than 112MB/s über two NICs

2011-04-12 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Apr 12), Dan Nelson said: In the last episode (Apr 12), Denny Schierz said: Am Montag, den 11.04.2011, 21:52 +0200 schrieb Denny Schierz: Am 11.04.2011 um 20:06 schrieb Tim Daneliuk: Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of

Re: Missing serial port after enabling serial console in loader.conf

2011-04-12 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 11:13:06PM +0200, Pawel Tyll wrote: P.S. -- What's BMC stand for? Baseband Management Controller. It's the separate NIC (sometimes it's piggy-backed on a NIC) used for remote management of motherboards. Usually includes IPMI support. Depending on the motherboard,