for you
I updated to stable yesterday, plus updated all my porst to
the latest pecompiled packages, but I am now seeing odd problems
with bash on exit. Sometimes it quits, but leaves a zombie
process... e.g
PID TT STATTIME COMMAND
44308 v0 IW 0:00.00 -bash (bash)
44312 v0 IW+ 0:00.00 /bin/sh
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 04:04:41PM +0200, Gerrit Kuhn wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 07:55:49 -0400 (EDT) Rick Macklem
rmack...@uoguelph.ca wrote about Re: dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate:
RM If you have tso enabled, you could try this patch:
RM https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3477
RM
RM If
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 07:55:49 -0400 (EDT) Rick Macklem
rmack...@uoguelph.ca wrote about Re: dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate:
RM If you have tso enabled, you could try this patch:
RM https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3477
RM
RM If TSO is disabled, then we don't have an explanation for poor NFS
RM
Hi,
We believe this is because phttpget (the pipelined HTTP client that
freebsd-update and portsnap uses) was unable to get the right file(s)
from the server, that sometimes the client would get wrong file from the
server, and it's not reproducable when requesting again. We have then
able to
On Aug 24, 2015, at 3:25 PM, Rick Macklem rmack...@uoguelph.ca wrote:
Daniel Braniss wrote:
On 24 Aug 2015, at 10:22, Hans Petter Selasky h...@selasky.org wrote:
On 08/24/15 01:02, Rick Macklem wrote:
The other thing is the degradation seems to cut the rate by about half
each time.
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:07:55PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
The only way I have been able to upgrade systems is by repeatedly running
freebsd-update.
Same here, one system needed three attempts of running freebsd-upgrade
and the other one four, on both I pointed to an update server
Hi,
I've made some minor modifications to the patch from Rick, and made this
review:
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3477
--HPS
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send
Michael Loftis wrote:
Normally when jails are added their IPs are created as normal
aliases, so they'll get a /32 netmask when you don't specify. So
Depending on how you're creating the jail you'll need to specify the
netmask with the IP wherever you configure your jail. (You didn't
mention
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:29:26 +0300 Slawa Olhovchenkov s...@zxy.spb.ru
wrote about dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate:
SO Last -stable, no tuning. Is this normal?
From 10.2-rel (and still having severe performance issues with NFS as
reported before):
dev.ix.0.queue7.interrupt_rate: 31250
See https://jenkins.FreeBSD.org/job/Build-UFS-image/2190/
--
Started by upstream project Build_Image_and_Run_Tests_in_Bhyve_stable_10
build number 763
originally caused by:
Started by upstream project FreeBSD_stable_10 build number 1643
originally caused
FreeBSD_STABLE_9-i386 - Build #137 - Fixed:
Build information: https://jenkins.FreeBSD.org/job/FreeBSD_STABLE_9-i386/137/
Full change log:
https://jenkins.FreeBSD.org/job/FreeBSD_STABLE_9-i386/137/changes
Full build log:
https://jenkins.FreeBSD.org/job/FreeBSD_STABLE_9-i386/137/console
Change
Gerritt Kuhn wrote:
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:29:26 +0300 Slawa Olhovchenkov s...@zxy.spb.ru
wrote about dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate:
SO Last -stable, no tuning. Is this normal?
From 10.2-rel (and still having severe performance issues with NFS as
reported before):
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
Danke für Ihre E-Mail. Zur Zeit können wir die Bearbeitung von E-Mails, welche
an dieses E-Mail-Konto direkt geschickt werden, nicht sicherstellen. Somit
bitten wir Sie in dringenden Fällen ihre Anfrage direkt an
supp...@byteaction.de zu richten. Wir werden uns
14 matches
Mail list logo
