On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 7:49 PM, McNutt, Justin M. wrote:
> So my server admins did what they're supposed to do and ran "yum update" on
> everything last weekend. The updates included a refresh of the "freeradius2"
> packages that took FR from 2.1.7 to 2.1.12.
Is this on RHEL5?
If yes, I HIGHL
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Vivek Mehrotra wrote:
> As the number of queries increases to a few ten-thousands, mysqld monopolizes
> the CPU.
> We wish to stop querying MySQL at that point.
> There's only so much "load_factor" can help?
> Would welcome alternate solutions as well..
You shoul
As the number of queries increases to a few ten-thousands, mysqld monopolizes
the CPU.
We wish to stop querying MySQL at that point.
There's only so much "load_factor" can help?
Would welcome alternate solutions as well..
Regards,
vivek
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Vivek Mehrotra wrote:
> Hello,
> We are using Freeradius2 with MySQL at the backend.
> I understand that the buffered sql takes care of buffering queries. What is
> the best way to stop querying MySQL altogether and return a negative
> response, after a certain t
Hello,
We are using Freeradius2 with MySQL at the backend.
I understand that the buffered sql takes care of buffering queries. What is the
best way to stop querying MySQL altogether and return a negative response,
after a certain threshold of processing is reached by the server?
Thanks in advance
Hello,
1. I have been compiling Freeradius 3.0.0 or Freeradius 2.x with the
--with-udpfromto flag, until very recently always on Mac OS X 10.4.11. Now I
find OS X 10.7 (Lion) "no longer defines SOL_IP for {get,set}sockopt()" as
described at http://trac.macports.org/ticket/30403. Inserting the f
u...@3.am wrote:
> I wasn't offended, I was apologetic and tried to offer an explanation for my
> current cognitive difficulties (perhaps you missed that part, because it was
> removed in your reply). I am a little taken aback by how much I have
> apparently
> offended you.
It's not that I'm o
> u...@3.am wrote:
>> I didn't ignore any response. I have no reason to worry about whether
>> Expiration
>> will work in "users" because A) I'm not using users, I'm using LDAP and B)
>> expiry
>> worked fine using rlm_pam and /etc/shadow.
>
> Once again, you completely misunderstand my point.
8 matches
Mail list logo