>
> I want to set the tcp_keepalive timer to 60 seconds and understand
> possible implications for Linux.
echo 60 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_keepalive_time
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
>
> Nobody has answered a basic concern:
> Why does Win2k work while Linux does not?
The answer could be as simple as the fact that Linux might be trying to
write to the exact memory location that is bad but Win2k has not. It might
also be that he in fact DOES have problems with win2k but is
> From: Alessandro Motter Ren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
> Which filesystem are you using on this machine?
> []s.
>
ext2fs on the production farm but I also have a pair of machines (SMB P-III
800) using reiserfs on mail spools. That pair of machines is not
particularly busy,
> I'm kind of astounded now, WHY can't linux-2.4.x run on ANY machine in
> my house with more than 128 MB RAM?!? Can someone please point out to me
> that he's actually running kernel-2.4.x on a machine with more than 128
> MB RAM and that he's NOT having severe stability problems?
Running
I'm kind of astounded now, WHY can't linux-2.4.x run on ANY machine in
my house with more than 128 MB RAM?!? Can someone please point out to me
that he's actually running kernel-2.4.x on a machine with more than 128
MB RAM and that he's NOT having severe stability problems?
Running 2.4.6-pre
From: Alessandro Motter Ren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Which filesystem are you using on this machine?
[]s.
ext2fs on the production farm but I also have a pair of machines (SMB P-III
800) using reiserfs on mail spools. That pair of machines is not
particularly busy, though.
Nobody has answered a basic concern:
Why does Win2k work while Linux does not?
The answer could be as simple as the fact that Linux might be trying to
write to the exact memory location that is bad but Win2k has not. It might
also be that he in fact DOES have problems with win2k but is
I want to set the tcp_keepalive timer to 60 seconds and understand
possible implications for Linux.
echo 60 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_keepalive_time
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info
> YHBT.
Evidently so.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> no SMP
> x86 only (and similar, e.g. Crusoe)
Never
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
no SMP
x86 only (and similar, e.g. Crusoe)
Never
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
YHBT.
Evidently so.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
I ran some more tests yesterday with a little more RAM than last
time and Rik's kernel performed much better than the vanilla kernel
in the face of memory pressure when it was very busy. I could get
both kernels into situations where they were unresponsive but these
periods of time were much
I ran some more tests yesterday with a little more RAM than last
time and Rik's kernel performed much better than the vanilla kernel
in the face of memory pressure when it was very busy. I could get
both kernels into situations where they were unresponsive but these
periods of time were much
Ok, new test. Apache, no keepalives. 85 requests/sec for a 10K file
128MB of RAM Processor is UP 700MHz Intel
vanilla 2.4.6-pre2
After everything settles down I have about 230-250 apache process running.
about 4% of CPU in user and roughly 6% in system.
Top shows:
18:12:47 up 59 min, 2
My bad, I just looked at my notes again. It both went away and returned with
right around 500 processes.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> That sounds like the machine just gets a working set
> larger than the amount of available memory. It should
> work better with eg. 96, 128 or more MBs of memory.
Now that I think about it a little more ... once I took it out of the
balancer and I got control back, I had over 500 apache kids
>
> That sounds like the machine just gets a working set
> larger than the amount of available memory. It should
> work better with eg. 96, 128 or more MBs of memory.
>
Right, I run them with 256M ... thought I would try to squeeze it a bit to
see what broke.
-
To unsubscribe from this list:
>
> This patch has given excellent results on my laptop and my
> workstation here and seems to improve kernel behaviour in tests
> quite a bit. I can play mp3's unbuffered during moderate write
> loads or moderately heavy IO ;)
>
> YMMV, please test it. If it works great for everybody I'd like
>
This patch has given excellent results on my laptop and my
workstation here and seems to improve kernel behaviour in tests
quite a bit. I can play mp3's unbuffered during moderate write
loads or moderately heavy IO ;)
YMMV, please test it. If it works great for everybody I'd like
to get
That sounds like the machine just gets a working set
larger than the amount of available memory. It should
work better with eg. 96, 128 or more MBs of memory.
Right, I run them with 256M ... thought I would try to squeeze it a bit to
see what broke.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
That sounds like the machine just gets a working set
larger than the amount of available memory. It should
work better with eg. 96, 128 or more MBs of memory.
Now that I think about it a little more ... once I took it out of the
balancer and I got control back, I had over 500 apache kids
My bad, I just looked at my notes again. It both went away and returned with
right around 500 processes.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please
Ok, new test. Apache, no keepalives. 85 requests/sec for a 10K file
128MB of RAM Processor is UP 700MHz Intel
vanilla 2.4.6-pre2
After everything settles down I have about 230-250 apache process running.
about 4% of CPU in user and roughly 6% in system.
Top shows:
18:12:47 up 59 min, 2
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.6-pre1/kernel/drivers/net/3c59x.o
depmod: do_softirq
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.6-pre1/kernel/drivers/net/bonding.o
depmod: do_softirq
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.6-pre1/kernel/drivers/net/3c59x.o
depmod: do_softirq
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.6-pre1/kernel/drivers/net/bonding.o
depmod: do_softirq
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
> I've been working with these boards for a couple months and thought they
> were great. However, now it turns out that they won't fit into our
> systems too well (a little too long). Does anyone have knowledge of
> another brand that has a (slightly) smaller form factor? I did some
> checking
I've been working with these boards for a couple months and thought they
were great. However, now it turns out that they won't fit into our
systems too well (a little too long). Does anyone have knowledge of
another brand that has a (slightly) smaller form factor? I did some
checking on
So I am fooling around with one of these things:
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineTMx86
cpu family : 5
model : 4
model name : Transmeta(tm) Crusoe(tm) Processor TM5600
stepping: 3
cpu MHz : 533.348
cache size : 512 KB
fdiv_bug: no
So I am fooling around with one of these things:
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineTMx86
cpu family : 5
model : 4
model name : Transmeta(tm) Crusoe(tm) Processor TM5600
stepping: 3
cpu MHz : 533.348
cache size : 512 KB
fdiv_bug: no
I will know better when the load ramps up next week but 2.4.4 (with Al
Viro's prune_icache() patch) just seems to "feel" better than the previous
2.4 kernels did. This is a UP Pentium-III with 256MB RAM used as a web
server with about 100 connections open as I write this and serving about 50
I will know better when the load ramps up next week but 2.4.4 (with Al
Viro's prune_icache() patch) just seems to feel better than the previous
2.4 kernels did. This is a UP Pentium-III with 256MB RAM used as a web
server with about 100 connections open as I write this and serving about 50
the vmstat and top -i info if anyone
is curious. It does not touch swap, though.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of George Bonser
> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 8:39 AM
> To: Rik van Riel
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Su
the vmstat and top -i info if anyone
is curious. It does not touch swap, though.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of George Bonser
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 8:39 AM
To: Rik van Riel
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: 2.4 stable when
>
> > Is there any information that would be helpful to the kernel
> > developers that I might be able to provide or is this a known issue
> > that is currently being worked out?
>
> I never heard about this problem. What would be helpful is to
> send a few minutes' (a full 'load cycle'?) worth
Is there any information that would be helpful to the kernel
developers that I might be able to provide or is this a known issue
that is currently being worked out?
I never heard about this problem. What would be helpful is to
send a few minutes' (a full 'load cycle'?) worth of output
>
> What kernel are you running?
That is 2.4.4-pre3
> This is disabled by default. search for
> where FASTRETRANS_DEBUG is enabled (should be in linux/include/net/tcp.h
> and set it someting low (like 1 which is the default. The actual error
> message comes up in tcp_input.c (search fro
What's all this in syslog? I don't remember ever seeing it there before.
...
Apr 14 13:58:31 foo kernel: Disorder0 3 5 f0 s2 rr1
Apr 14 13:58:32 foo kernel: Disorder0 3 5 f0 s1 rr1
Apr 14 13:58:41 foo kernel: Disorder0 3 8 f0 s0 rr1
Apr 14 13:58:44 foo kernel: Disorder0 3 5 f0 s0 rr1
Apr 14
I have a web server farm that right now has about 125 apache processes
running per machine. If I try to use 2.4.3 or even 2.4.3-ac6 it will go to
about 400 (meaning it is slow in clearing connections), the load average
will start to climb until it gets to close to 100 and then stops responding.
I have a web server farm that right now has about 125 apache processes
running per machine. If I try to use 2.4.3 or even 2.4.3-ac6 it will go to
about 400 (meaning it is slow in clearing connections), the load average
will start to climb until it gets to close to 100 and then stops responding.
What kernel are you running?
That is 2.4.4-pre3
This is disabled by default. search for
where FASTRETRANS_DEBUG is enabled (should be in linux/include/net/tcp.h
and set it someting low (like 1 which is the default. The actual error
message comes up in tcp_input.c (search fro
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/local/src/linux/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O
2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary
=2 -march=i686 -DMODULE -DMODVERSIONS -include
/usr/local/src/linux/include/linux/modversions.h -c -o nbd.o nbd.c
nbd.c: In function
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/local/src/linux/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O
2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary
=2 -march=i686 -DMODULE -DMODVERSIONS -include
/usr/local/src/linux/include/linux/modversions.h -c -o nbd.o nbd.c
nbd.c: In function
So according to the below, Linux development should be considered an
environmental hazard? Maybe it is in the best interest of Planet Earth that
we should provide some safe place, possibly some South Pacific island, where
we could set up a quarrantine camp for hardcore linux developers. All of
So according to the below, Linux development should be considered an
environmental hazard? Maybe it is in the best interest of Planet Earth that
we should provide some safe place, possibly some South Pacific island, where
we could set up a quarrantine camp for hardcore linux developers. All of
I grabbed a complete 2.4.3 tarball and that seems to have fixed the problem.
Something must have gotten borked in the patching process somewhere.
And the sad part is that I know to do that before posting ... :-(
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
Just tried to build 2.4.3, got:
make[6]: Entering directory
`/usr/local/src/linux/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aicasm'
gcc -I/usr/include -ldb1 aicasm_gram.c aicasm_scan.c aicasm.c
aicasm_symbol.c -o aicasm
aicasm/aicasm_gram.y:45: ../queue.h: No such file or directory
aicasm/aicasm_gram.y:50: aicasm.h:
Just tried to build 2.4.3, got:
make[6]: Entering directory
`/usr/local/src/linux/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aicasm'
gcc -I/usr/include -ldb1 aicasm_gram.c aicasm_scan.c aicasm.c
aicasm_symbol.c -o aicasm
aicasm/aicasm_gram.y:45: ../queue.h: No such file or directory
aicasm/aicasm_gram.y:50: aicasm.h:
48 matches
Mail list logo
