unionfs umount problem
Hello, If this question belongs on freebsd-fs, let me know and I'll repost. I had emailed a question to the list a few months ago, asking what the current status was on unionfs and whether it was now somewhat stable, since the man page still reports it as broken and without a maintainer. Some people on the list had reported that they had been using unionfs without any problems for a few releases now, so I thought I would try merging some of what we do with jails into a model using unionfs and see if I ran into any problems. The initial tests went fine of mounting an empty vnode, which would represent client disk space, and mounting a unionfs mount of a complete world into the vnode and starting the jail with this unionfs mounted as / inside the jail. The system runs fine, but I ran into a problem when taking it down. The system calls /etc/rc.shutdown, then kills the remaining processes from the host environment, then umounts /proc and /dev. No problems. But when the unionfs is called for umount, it reports EBUSY, and never releases. Forcing it to umount with -f hangs the calling process, never to return. Even upon system shutdown or reboot, the process will not terminate, and will even prevent the box from rebooting sometimes. I've checked that no processes are left in the jail and the prison itself seems to be fully collapsed. I also checked open file handles with fstat and lsof. I can't seem to find anything running that would be tying up the mount point. Could it be that something called vfs_busy on the mountpoint, then terminated and never released it? Is there any tools available to check details like this? Or even, to remove such a bit from the mount so that it can be umounted safely? A few other side notes on unionfs, it seems pretty solid other than the above and the white-out support (if unionfs is the lower layer and vnode is the top layer, you can delete files that only exist in the lower layer and they do not show up in the upper vnode layer anymore, but are still intact in the lower unionfs layer) is nice, though that's probably a feature of ufs since ufs is controlling the upper layer. A completely different question: We are thinking of removing the use of vnodes to use as client disk space but need some way to control their disk space usage. Is there such a thing as directory quotas? I'm sure somebody must have asked this before, but I've never heard mention of it. I assume there must be some reason to avoid it, or somebody would have put this in by now. Thanks for any suggestions. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No SMP on Compaq ML350 with FBSD 5.3-RE
Hello, I'm sure this problem would have been found before, but so far, I can't see any trace of it in searches. I just picked up a Compaq ML350 for free from a liquidator, runs fine it seems, and has dual P-II 600MHz CPUs. The BIOS post shows the two CPUs, as does the BIOS System Info function. However, a fresh install of FreeBSD 5.3-RE shows only a single CPU, and utilities like top reflect this as well. Attached is the dmesg output. Since this is such old hardware, I'm really surprised that it doesn't just simply work. Thoughts? -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net Copyright (c) 1992-2004 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE #0: Tue Jun 28 23:38:16 PDT 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SERVER Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel Pentium III (596.00-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x681 Stepping = 1 Features=0x383fbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR,SSE real memory = 1073741824 (1024 MB) avail memory = 1045381120 (996 MB) ACPI APIC Table: COMPAQ MAPICTBL ioapic0: Changing APIC ID to 8 ioapic1: Changing APIC ID to 3 ioapic1 Version 1.1 irqs 16-31 on motherboard ioapic0 Version 1.1 irqs 0-15 on motherboard npx0: [FAST] npx0: math processor on motherboard npx0: INT 16 interface acpi0: COMPAQ CPQD020 on motherboard acpi0: Power Button (fixed) unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported unknown: I/O range not supported Timecounter ACPI-safe frequency 3579545 Hz quality 1000 acpi_timer0: 32-bit timer at 3.579545MHz port 0xf808-0xf80b on acpi0 cpu0: ACPI CPU (2 Cx states) on acpi0 pcib0: ACPI Host-PCI bridge port 0xcf8-0xcff on acpi0 pci0: ACPI PCI bus on pcib0 pcib1: PCI-PCI bridge at device 1.0 on pci0 pci1: PCI bus on pcib1 ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Idea about skeleton jail
On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 11:40 +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 11:13:04PM -0800, Justin Hopper wrote: + We are considering open sourcing all of our stuff, to contribute back + what we can to the OS that allowed us to build our entire company. I'd + really like to see what others have done to make jails more manageable, + as it seems like there is so much that can be done but not many people + are working on it. It seems jails have the potential to become an + incredible way to virtually partition servers, and it would not be that + hard to implement solid tools for managing them. We have things like + JID-aware top and tools for automated jail builds, but it would be great + to work with some FreeBSD heavies to finish up clean development of + things like jail resource restrictions (CPU,MEM,#PROCS,etc) and perhaps + a clean and universally useful way to easily configure and launch full + jail environments. Yes, it would be useful (I mean CPU/MEM/#PROCS limits), but as I understand there are two kinds of opinions about jails. First is that it should be extended and allow to create a real virtual server and second is that it should be light-weight. I would definitely like to see the jails extended in a way that would still leave them uncomplicated for people that just want to jail a single process or create a very simple jailed environment. I'm hoping that all the extensions can be created in a way that will not interfere with this. For example, each prison can have CPU/MEM/#PROCS limits in them, but by default they would be ignored. We have implemented MEM and #PROCS limits in our prison structures, but we have not settled on a method to control them. Currently we are using a kernel module approach that allows the alteration of prison values, but there is no proper locking, so it's of course not safe. + Pawel had some really interesting ideas for jails, but it seems that + he's too busy to work on them at the moment. Speaking of which, his + multiple IPs patch for 5.3 is still broken, and I haven't been able to + find what the problem is =( Could you describe the brokeness? I had sent you an email about 4 weeks ago about it, but didn't hear a response. I also emailed the hackers list about it, but no one responded. There was also a Devon H. O'Dell who said that he might be able to assist with any problems with the patch, but emails to him were not answered either. The problem is simply that jails cannot use sockets. I can forward my email with kernel trace if you do not have a copy. I've made some fixes a week or something ago, I just created a patch against HEAD if you want to try it: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/jail_2005020101.patch There can still be some remaining issues, but I don't have time for more detailed tests. Excellent, I'll try the patch here in a couple of minutes. Can you tell me what the known issues are with the patch? Perhaps I can lend a hand on helping to resolve them. The thing that can be useful IMHO is possibility to use reboot(8)/shutdown(8), etc. inside a jail, but... I'm unfortunately too busy with other (probably less interesting, but profitable) projects. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Idea about skeleton jail
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 21:39 +0800, Xin LI wrote: Dear folks, The recent discussion about whether we should have the perl port to touch/install /usr/bin/perl. While I'm not interested in joining the discussion, it inspired me that we can make use of the fact that ports should not install things to system area and take advantage from it. Finally these ideas results me to hack up something that might be valuable to share with our users. What I am going to proposal is a concept that I call it skeleton jail, or skeljail for short. A skel jail is something that shares most base system binaries/libraries with the host, through read-only mount_null's. I have already done some experiments. Basically we want the following directories to be mount_null'ed: /bin, /sbin, /lib, /libexec, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /usr/include, /usr/lib, /usr/libdata, /usr/libexec, /usr/sbin, /usr/share We had looked into this idea at one point for our hosting systems, but what deterred us was the fact that on our systems we run several jails per box, around 50, and to have a mount for each system directory (12 or so) inside each jail would lead to a box loaded with mount points (600 +). I never looked into it fully, but I assumed this would be a resource problem, having so many mounts. Also, at that time we were using FreeBSD 4.4, and nullfs would sometimes cause kernel panics when trying to umount the jails. I'm curious if your idea for jails extends to running 50+ jails on a box or not? I'd definitely be interested in any feedback you have on what problems may or may not be encountered with so many mounts and also the stability of nullfs nowadays. For our 5.x hosting platform, we used a single shared filesystem that was mounted in each client jail, that contained the basic FreeBSD distribution. Ports are handled in a similar manner, having all the basic and commonly used ports already installed in the shared filesystem, and if the user wants to install their own ports, they go into the user's filesystem. We are considering open sourcing all of our stuff, to contribute back what we can to the OS that allowed us to build our entire company. I'd really like to see what others have done to make jails more manageable, as it seems like there is so much that can be done but not many people are working on it. It seems jails have the potential to become an incredible way to virtually partition servers, and it would not be that hard to implement solid tools for managing them. We have things like JID-aware top and tools for automated jail builds, but it would be great to work with some FreeBSD heavies to finish up clean development of things like jail resource restrictions (CPU,MEM,#PROCS,etc) and perhaps a clean and universally useful way to easily configure and launch full jail environments. Pawel had some really interesting ideas for jails, but it seems that he's too busy to work on them at the moment. Speaking of which, his multiple IPs patch for 5.3 is still broken, and I haven't been able to find what the problem is =( To get most of what we want the jail to do, to work, this includes ssh(1) and something else. Optionally, we may want to mount_nullfs a read-write /usr/ports/distfiles, a readonly /usr/ports, and something like /usr/game to be mounted into the skeljail. In order to avoid having to do something magic instead of make installworld, I have a patchset against src/Makefile and src/Makefile.incl to make the work a bit easier. It adds a so-called installskel target that creates a skeljail that contains necessary directory hierarchy, and a set of /etc configuration files that will be useful to start the jail. The target must be used after a ``make buildworld'' The two major benefits for the skeljail are: - Reduces the ordinary management cost because many base system files are shared, hence you patch only once to get all jails patched. - Reduces the space cost that needed for a newly created jail. It used to need about 110MB and with skeljail you will only need no more than 3MB. Apparantly skeljail is not suitable for those who want: - Run different FreeBSD releases on a single box. - Run ports that does touch system area. But having it doesn't hurt the ability for you to run a full jail. I have some handcrafted shell scripts to implement skeljail by having everything automatically mounted/dismounted. However, I think it might be better if we can have jail_name_skeljail=YES switch in our jail rc.d(8) startup script. Please let me know if you are interested in the idea and I'll post a patch for review if there's enough people that wants this. Thanks in advance! Cheers, -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd
Multiple IPs in jail
Two questions: 1) Is there any formal plans to incorporate the functionality of jails binding multiple IPs into the FreeBSD base any time soon? 2) Has anyone used Pawel's multiple IP patch in a semi-production environment? Can anyone report any problems or issues that they've had with it? Thanks. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multiple IPs in jail
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 00:26 -0800, Aaron Glenn wrote: On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:23:24 -0800, Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two questions: 1) Is there any formal plans to incorporate the functionality of jails binding multiple IPs into the FreeBSD base any time soon? Someone hasn't read up on 5.x... I'm confused. I've been running and developing on 5.x for a few months now, and I'm pretty sure that multiple IPs are not supported (it's always possible that I've missed something...). I was curious if Poul or anyone else had plans to put the functionality into the base system in the near future? 2) Has anyone used Pawel's multiple IP patch in a semi-production environment? Can anyone report any problems or issues that they've had with it? I toyed with it at home without a single issue. Still, in a hosting environment I'd use 5.x The patch from Pawel that I was looking at was against-CURRENT, so I was assuming that was for 5, and not some 4.x-CURRENT branch? -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multiple IPs in jail
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 11:51 +0100, Devon H. O'Dell wrote: Justin Hopper wrote: On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 00:26 -0800, Aaron Glenn wrote: On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:23:24 -0800, Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two questions: 1) Is there any formal plans to incorporate the functionality of jails binding multiple IPs into the FreeBSD base any time soon? Someone hasn't read up on 5.x... I'm confused. I've been running and developing on 5.x for a few months now, and I'm pretty sure that multiple IPs are not supported (it's always possible that I've missed something...). I was curious if Poul or anyone else had plans to put the functionality into the base system in the near future? Correct. 5.x does not have this feature; Aaron, please read for yourself before you are rude towards others. 2) Has anyone used Pawel's multiple IP patch in a semi-production environment? Can anyone report any problems or issues that they've had with it? I toyed with it at home without a single issue. Still, in a hosting environment I'd use 5.x Are you sure you toyed with it? And in a production environment, I'd still recommend 4.10. The patch from Pawel that I was looking at was against-CURRENT, so I was assuming that was for 5, and not some 4.x-CURRENT branch? Correct. Pawel's patches haven't been incorporated for various reasons, but I'm not a committer, so I won't give them. There have been several threads on the list questioning this over the last year and a half. I have run the MIP patch and found no problems. I believe there is a race condition that it introduces, but that could be irrelevant / incorrect information. I'll leave it up to PJD and others to provide any more information if it is necessary and to you to search the lists for the other relevant threads. Thanks for understanding my question, Devon. I guess at this point I'll patch a system here and begin testing with it, and hopefully PJD or PHK or somebody else @freebsd will respond with any plans to roll this functionality into the base system. It's really not a problem if there is no plans to do it, I just don't want to spend a lot of time fiddling with a patch and then find it in the base system in 5.4 or something. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multiple IPs in jail
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 01:42 +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:51:31AM -0800, Justin Hopper wrote: + Thanks for understanding my question, Devon. I guess at this point I'll + patch a system here and begin testing with it, and hopefully PJD or PHK + or somebody else @freebsd will respond with any plans to roll this + functionality into the base system. It's really not a problem if there + is no plans to do it, I just don't want to spend a lot of time fiddling + with a patch and then find it in the base system in 5.4 or something. My patch still has some issues. I updated the patch against HEAD from a minute ago: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/jail_2004120901.patch I don't have time to work on this right now, so can't say if/when it'll be committed. Thanks for the update, Pawel. The new patch was pretty easy to implement, only failed on one chunk. The new system is up and I'll be testing the multiple IPs soon. If there are any known pitfalls that I should be aware of, please let me know, or if there is a list/discussion of them somewhere, I'd be grateful for the link. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HD Mirroring
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 23:08, Justin Hopper wrote: On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 13:31, Charles Sprickman wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Brian Reichert wrote: And, although I've not tested it, recent versions of MySQL can outright support a cluster: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/NDBCluster.html I'm just curious if there's any other solution that will work on FreeBSD. I have about 5 mysql servers (4 slaves, 1 master) and one application in particular is not smart enough to try other servers if the configured server does not answer. Is there any type of local proxy that can intelligently route requests to the best server? I too was curious about the MySQL Clustering support and its status on FreeBSD, since it wasn't as a supported OS. Over the last couple of hours I was able to set up a cluster consisting of a management process and data node running in one jail, and a MySQL server and another data node running in a different jail. Once everything was up and running, the cluster seemed to be working excellent, data was synchronizing flawlessly throughout the cluster. Nuking either of the data node processes did not affect access to the data in the cluster, so failover seemed to be working as well. The only problem that I ran into, and it may be user error on my part, is that when the cluster is shut down (or all data node processes are killed), the data contained in the node is lost when the cluster is brought back online. Perhaps there is some recovery step that is required before the cluster can be used again. If someone else has already tested MySQL's clustering ability with FreeBSD, then please let us know the results so that I don't recreate the wheel here. If not, I'll continue seeing how far I can get with it, as I would definitely like to implement this functionality on several of the more critical databases that I manage. I'm sure it's taboo to respond to one's own message, but thought I would follow up with some information on the problems I was running into with MySQL Cluster. The first problem, where it appeared that the data in the cluster was lost when the cluster was shut down, turned out to be there are some problems with the MySQL servers, which act as API clients to the cluster, reliably connecting into the cluster. Several times I could not get a MySQL server to connect to the cluster, but found no rhyme or reason for it so far. The cluster seems to be retaining data just fine upon shutdown, when the MySQL servers can actually connect to it to query data that is... The second problem I encountered was while trying to load a table that was 163MB in size that contained around 1 million rows. The NDB cluster would continually report that the table was full when trying to import the data. After checking around on mailing lists, I found out that the NDB clustering engine will require around table_size*2*10% RAM to load a table. NDB keeps all of the data in main memory, and has a fair amount of overhead per row. Perhaps somebody else can do a more thorough test of MySQL clustering on FreeBSD to make sure that it is in fact fully stable. It seems like a remarkable system, assuming you have the gigs of RAM it takes to run it with a table of any substantial size... -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HD Mirroring
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 12:24, Andre Oppermann wrote: ...(snip)... Perhaps somebody else can do a more thorough test of MySQL clustering on FreeBSD to make sure that it is in fact fully stable. It seems like a remarkable system, assuming you have the gigs of RAM it takes to run it with a table of any substantial size... But that is an application problem, not FreeBSD's fault. I certainly did not mean to imply that this was a problem with FreeBSD, nor even a problem in MySQL Cluster, I simply meant that the RAM requirements for MySQL Cluster are higher than one might guess. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jail + sysv shmem
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 11:38, Koen Martens wrote: Hello Hackers, For a while i've been wanting shared memory to be usable withing jails, but with cross-jail protection. Ie. shared memory is restricted to a jail. Recently I've been digging a bit in the freebsd kernel source code (which is new to me, been doing quite some linux kernel hacking though). It looks like this is actually not _that_ difficult to implement. So, did anyone try this yet? Any pointers? I know that Pawel @ http://garage.freebsd.pl has a patch for making private SysV IPC memory spaces for the host system and each jail: http://garage.freebsd.pl/privipc.README The patch is against 4.x though, and I've never tried it. I would really like to see something like this implemented for 5.x though. Does anyone know if there are plans to implement this in the future 5.x releases? If not, I would be interested in helping anyone that wishes to try implementing this in 5.3 soon, as we have a lot of clients who ask for SysV IPC inside of jailed hosting environments. Or perhaps there is a new IPC implementation that FreeBSD is looking at and perhaps they will dump SysV IPC altogether? -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HD Mirroring
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 13:31, Charles Sprickman wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Brian Reichert wrote: And, although I've not tested it, recent versions of MySQL can outright support a cluster: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/NDBCluster.html I'm just curious if there's any other solution that will work on FreeBSD. I have about 5 mysql servers (4 slaves, 1 master) and one application in particular is not smart enough to try other servers if the configured server does not answer. Is there any type of local proxy that can intelligently route requests to the best server? I too was curious about the MySQL Clustering support and its status on FreeBSD, since it wasn't as a supported OS. Over the last couple of hours I was able to set up a cluster consisting of a management process and data node running in one jail, and a MySQL server and another data node running in a different jail. Once everything was up and running, the cluster seemed to be working excellent, data was synchronizing flawlessly throughout the cluster. Nuking either of the data node processes did not affect access to the data in the cluster, so failover seemed to be working as well. The only problem that I ran into, and it may be user error on my part, is that when the cluster is shut down (or all data node processes are killed), the data contained in the node is lost when the cluster is brought back online. Perhaps there is some recovery step that is required before the cluster can be used again. If someone else has already tested MySQL's clustering ability with FreeBSD, then please let us know the results so that I don't recreate the wheel here. If not, I'll continue seeing how far I can get with it, as I would definitely like to implement this functionality on several of the more critical databases that I manage. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flash plugin
Hello, I was hopeful for using the Flash plugin with FireFox in FreeBSD when I noticed that there was a port for it. However, the plugin seems to be pretty dated, though I can't tell exactly what version of the player it is. Does anyone know if the author is working on a new version? I'd be curious to know how somebody can even port a compiled shared object, which seems to be the only version of the plugin that Macromedia offers, to a different OS like FreeBSD. Thanks for any info. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MySQL benchmarks
Here are the results of the brief benchmarks that I ran. I posted the best and worse results out of running each test 5 times. - System: Dual Opteron 244s RAM 1GB 3 x 36GB U320 SCSI RAID-5 on Adaptec 2120s - OS: FreeBSD snip 5.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE #2: Mon Nov 15 10:35:13 PST 2004 snip i386 --- MySQL 4.1.7 WITH_OPENSSL BUILD_OPTIMIZED --- master# super-smack update-select.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker connect: max=15ms min=4ms avg= 8ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index30 3 0 4365.04 update_index30 4 0 4365.04 master# super-smack update-select.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker connect: max=12ms min=0ms avg= 7ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index30 3 0 4799.58 update_index30 3 0 4799.58 master# super-smack select-key.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker1 connect: max=10ms min=7ms avg= 9ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index60 3 0 10614.75 master# super-smack select-key.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker1 connect: max=10ms min=6ms avg= 7ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index60 4 0 10666.14 --- MySQL 4.0.22 WITH_OPENSSL BUILD_OPTIMIZED --- master# super-smack update-select.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker connect: max=13ms min=9ms avg= 11ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index30 3 0 4839.98 update_index30 3 0 4839.98 master# super-smack update-select.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker connect: max=22ms min=0ms avg= 17ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index30 3 0 4963.34 update_index30 2 0 4963.34 master# super-smack select-key.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker1 connect: max=19ms min=5ms avg= 9ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index60 2 0 12387.57 master# super-smack select-key.smack 30 1 Query Barrel Report for client smacker1 connect: max=15ms min=0ms avg= 7ms from 30 clients Query_type num_queries max_timemin_timeq_per_s select_index60 2 0 13201.30 -- It seems 4.0.22 is faster in each benchmark. Around a 20% increase. I wonder why this is? -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mysql - Linuxthreads : Still needed?
On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 13:23, jesk wrote: # BSD cd /var/tmp/BSD-threads pkg_add mysql-server-4.1.7.tgz /usr/local/etc/rc.d/mysql-server.sh start i suggest you to use mysql4.0 its about more than 50% faster. This is unfortunate, since 4.1.7 is the recommended release from MySQL AB. Does anyone know why 4.0 is faster, or is it only faster in some cases (anybody have any benchmarks?) ? 50% is quite a large margin and I'm sure most people, myself included, are looking for maximum performance. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mysql - Linuxthreads : Still needed?
Hello, I know using Linuxthreads with mysql used to be the optimal combination, but now with the new threading libraries in 5.x, is this still the case? System is dual Opteron, running 5.3-i386. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mysql - Linuxthreads : Still needed?
On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 10:34, John Baldwin wrote: On Monday 08 November 2004 12:46 pm, Justin Hopper wrote: Hello, I know using Linuxthreads with mysql used to be the optimal combination, but now with the new threading libraries in 5.x, is this still the case? System is dual Opteron, running 5.3-i386. Try it both ways and see how it fares is probably your best bet. Ok, just wanted to make sure that somebody hadn't done this already. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HyperSCSI on FreeBSD?
Just curious if anyone was working on either a port of HyperSCSI to FreeBSD, or perhaps some other similar project for exported file systems. I'm not a fan of NFS myself, and the idea of iSCSI and HyperSCSI seems pretty intriguing, but there seems to be no FreeBSD support mentioned anywhere. The source code for the HyperSCSI server and client seems to be quite small, though it's Linux kernel code, so a complete rewrite would probably have to happen. Anyways, just curious if anybody had any thoughts about the porting or what FreeBSD might have planned for this sort of functionality. -- Justin Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
