Re: IPC Shared memory segment
The solution was given at revision 233760. Link for description: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revisionrevision=233760 Thanks to all! -- Respectfully, Stanislav Putrya System administrator FotoStrana.Ru Ltd. ICQ IM: 328585847 Jabber-GoogleTalk: root.vagner mob.phone SPB: +79215788755 mob.phone RND: +79525600664 email: vag...@bsdway.ru email: put...@playform.ru email: root.vag...@gmail.com site: bsdway.ru site: fotostrana.ru ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign X - against HTML, vCards and / \ - proprietary attachments in e-mail ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
IPC Shared memory segment
Hi all! Tell me please, how may I remove shared memory segment like this: T:m shmid:65537 shmkey:0 mode:--rw-rw-rw- owner:root group:wheel creator:root cgroup:wheel NATTCH:2 SEGSZ:1048576000 CPID:2982 LPID:54375 ATIME:10:29:12 DTIME:15:56:14 CTIME:10:51:00 Pid 2982 and pid 54375 is killed. -- Respectfully, Stanislav Putrya System administrator FotoStrana.Ru Ltd. ICQ IM: 328585847 Jabber-GoogleTalk: root.vagner mob.phone SPB: +79215788755 mob.phone RND: +79525600664 email: vag...@bsdway.ru email: put...@playform.ru email: root.vag...@gmail.com site: bsdway.ru site: fotostrana.ru ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign X - against HTML, vCards and / \ - proprietary attachments in e-mail ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IPC Shared memory segment
On 03/19/2013 13:06, Vagner wrote: Hi all! Tell me please, how may I remove shared memory segment like this: T:m shmid:65537 shmkey:0 mode:--rw-rw-rw- owner:root group:wheel creator:root cgroup:wheel NATTCH:2 SEGSZ:1048576000 CPID:2982 LPID:54375 ATIME:10:29:12 DTIME:15:56:14 CTIME:10:51:00 Pid 2982 and pid 54375 is killed. man ipcrm -- No trees were killed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Linux app shared memory problem
Trying to run a Linux app under 9-STABLE. I can start it once and stop it once but all subsequent efforts produces a core dump. I believe the reason being that this app stores licensing information in shared memory and when it stops first time it fails to remove this info. Is there a sysctl parameter that would be useful in a case like this? Thanks, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Linux app shared memory problem
On 08/12/12 11:12, Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Trying to run a Linux app under 9-STABLE. I can start it once and stop it once but all subsequent efforts produces a core dump. I believe the reason being that this app stores licensing information in shared memory and when it stops first time it fails to remove this info. Is there a sysctl parameter that would be useful in a case like this? Additional info: linux_set_robust_list(0x2820c710,0xc,0x2808fff4,0x2820c6c0,0x0,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_sys_futex(0xcc90,0x81,0x1,0x2820c6c0,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_rt_sigaction(0x20,0xc948,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_rt_sigaction(0x21,0xc948,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_rt_sigprocmask(0x1,0xcbfc,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_getrlimit(0x3,0xcc84,0x28207ff4,0x10,0x1,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_newuname(0xc9f8,0x2820b400,0x2808fff4,0x0,0xc9f8,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_ipc(0x17,0x4f524553,0x1,0x3ff,0x0,0x6) = 65536 (0x1) linux_ipc(0x15,0x1,0x0,0xcbe8,0x0,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_ipc(0x2,0x4f726583,0x1,0x1ff,0x0,0x6) ERR#13 'Permission denied' linux_ipc(0x3,0x,0x0,0x10c,0xca68,0x6) ERR#22 'Invalid argument' linux_rt_sigaction(0xe,0xc9c8,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_alarm(0x14,0x0,0x80589d8,0xcb10,0xcb94,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_ipc(0x1,0x,0x1,0x0,0xcba0,0x6) ERR#22 'Invalid argument' linux_rt_sigaction(0xe,0xc9c8,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_alarm(0x0,0x0,0x80589d8,0x,0xcba0,0x6) = 20 (0x14) linux_ipc(0x3,0x,0x0,0x10c,0xca88,0x6) ERR#22 'Invalid argument' linux_rt_sigaction(0xe,0xc9e8,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_alarm(0x14,0x0,0x80589d8,0xcb30,0xcbb4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_ipc(0x1,0x,0x1,0x0,0xcbc0,0x6) ERR#22 'Invalid argument' linux_rt_sigaction(0xe,0xc9e8,0x0,0x8,0x2808fff4,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_alarm(0x0,0x0,0x80589d8,0x,0xcbc0,0x6) = 20 (0x14) linux_fstat64(0x1,0xcaf4,0x28207ff4,0x282084c0,0x282084c0,0x6) = 0 (0x0) linux_mmap2(0x0,0x1000,0x3,0x22,0x,0x6) = 671576064 (0x28077000) Shared memory problem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Apache FCGI in a a jail under FBSD 9 won't start due to shared memory creation error
On Aug 9, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Fbsd8 wrote: Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC wrote: On Aug 7, 2012, at 10:31 AM, Mark Felder wrote: jail_sysvipc_allow=YES in rc.conf should do it. Hmm I added that and rebooted the jail host system. However, the setting in sysctl security.jail.sysvipc_allowed is still 0 after the reboot # sysctl -a | grep sysvipc security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc: 0 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed: 0 # I can set security.jail.sysvipc_allowed to 1 manually. However, even after doing that, the original fcgi problem happens when starting apache2.2 with mod_fcgid in the configuration and being loaded [Tue Aug 07 13:09:12 2012] [emerg] (78)Function not implemented: mod_fcgid: Can't create shared memory for size 1192488 bytes Thanks! Chad Since you manually installed apache22 and mod_fcgid from up-stream sources maybe you missed something. As a test create another jail and install the package versions of apache22 and mod_fcgid and see if that will start ok. If it does them you know you missed something in your hand job version. Hi Thanks for the suggestion. I don't think, however, that anything is missing with my from-source compilations. I have been running self-compiled apaches for 15 years and have also done mod_fcgid in the past as well without issue (but not inside a jail). I don't think it is a matter of sw missing, but of system parameters or similar.' Thanks Chad
Re: Apache FCGI in a a jail under FBSD 9 won't start due to shared memory creation error
Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC wrote: On Aug 7, 2012, at 10:31 AM, Mark Felder wrote: jail_sysvipc_allow=YES in rc.conf should do it. Hmm I added that and rebooted the jail host system. However, the setting in sysctl security.jail.sysvipc_allowed is still 0 after the reboot # sysctl -a | grep sysvipc security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc: 0 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed: 0 # I can set security.jail.sysvipc_allowed to 1 manually. However, even after doing that, the original fcgi problem happens when starting apache2.2 with mod_fcgid in the configuration and being loaded [Tue Aug 07 13:09:12 2012] [emerg] (78)Function not implemented: mod_fcgid: Can't create shared memory for size 1192488 bytes Thanks! Chad Since you manually installed apache22 and mod_fcgid from up-stream sources maybe you missed something. As a test create another jail and install the package versions of apache22 and mod_fcgid and see if that will start ok. If it does them you know you missed something in your hand job version. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Apache FCGI in a a jail under FBSD 9 won't start due to shared memory creation error
Hi. I'll try this again. I run systems using FreeBSD 9.0 FreeBSD utah.XXXcom 9.0-STABLE FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE #1: Wed Mar 21 15:22:14 MDT 2012 chad@underhill:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/UNDERHILL-XEN amd64 and on those systems run a bunch of jails. I have Apache 2.2 built and running in the jail in question, and recently had need to add mod_fcgid to it. NOTE that the Apache and mod_fcgid were not installed through ports or packages. I download the source and build myself (for various reasons). Apache inside the Jail, with mod_fcgid enabled will not start: [Mon Jul 23 10:59:35 2012] [emerg] (78)Function not implemented: mod_fcgid: Can't create shared memory for size 1192488 bytes I did a search on this and found that I would probably need a system kernel parameter changed from 0 - 1 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed So I did that. (And restarted the jail). However, I still get the same error when trying to start apache. I noticed a similar parameter security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc but cannot change this at run time and did not find anything useful about what this parameter is for using a search engine. (As an aside, how would I change security.jail.sysvipc_allowed and also security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc at boot time? I added them both to /boot/loader.conf but they did not get changed at boot and I had to do the security.jail.sysvipc_allowed one again on the command line -- I have some vfs type kernel state variables set there and they stick) I would appreciate some help with getting things set up so that I can run apache with mod_fcgid under my Jails on FBSD 9. Thanks! Chad
Re: Apache FCGI in a a jail under FBSD 9 won't start due to shared memory creation error
jail_sysvipc_allow=YES in rc.conf should do it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Apache FCGI in a a jail under FBSD 9 won't start due to shared memory creation error
On Aug 7, 2012, at 10:31 AM, Mark Felder wrote: jail_sysvipc_allow=YES in rc.conf should do it. Hmm I added that and rebooted the jail host system. However, the setting in sysctl security.jail.sysvipc_allowed is still 0 after the reboot # sysctl -a | grep sysvipc security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc: 0 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed: 0 # I can set security.jail.sysvipc_allowed to 1 manually. However, even after doing that, the original fcgi problem happens when starting apache2.2 with mod_fcgid in the configuration and being loaded [Tue Aug 07 13:09:12 2012] [emerg] (78)Function not implemented: mod_fcgid: Can't create shared memory for size 1192488 bytes Thanks! Chad
Apache FCGI in a a jail under FBSD 9 won't start due to shared memory creation error
Hi I run systems using FreeBSD 9.0 FreeBSD utah.XXXcom 9.0-STABLE FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE #1: Wed Mar 21 15:22:14 MDT 2012 chad@underhill:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/UNDERHILL-XEN amd64 and on those systems run a bunch of jails. I have Apache 2.2 built and running in the jail in question, and recently had need to add mod_fcgid to it. NOTE that the Apache and mod_fcgid were not installed through ports or packages. I download the source and build myself (for various reasons). Apache inside the Jail, with mod_fcgid enabled will not start: [Mon Jul 23 10:59:35 2012] [emerg] (78)Function not implemented: mod_fcgid: Can't create shared memory for size 1192488 bytes I did a search on this and found that I would probably need a system kernel parameter changed from 0 - 1 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed So I did that. (And restarted the jail). However, I still get the same error when trying to start apache. I noticed a similar parameter security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc but cannot change this at run time and did not find anything useful about what this parameter is for using a search engine. (As an aside, how would I change security.jail.sysvipc_allowed and also security.jail.param.allow.sysvipc at boot time? I added them both to /boot/loader.conf but they did not get changed at boot and I had to do the security.jail.sysvipc_allowed one again on the command line -- I have some vfs type kernel state variables set there and they stick) I would appreciate some help with getting things set up so that I can run apache with mod_fcgid under my Jails on FBSD 9. Thanks! Chad ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Shared Memory allocation in jail
Hi, I am trying to run both postgres and zabbix in the same jail and I am only able to start postgres or zabbix not both of them. I have tuned my sysctl on master host as follow : kern.ipc.shmmax=268435456 kern.ipc.shmall=409600 kern.ipc.semmap=256 security.jail.allow_raw_sockets=1 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 security.jail.enforce_statfs=1 No special tunning on jail host. I have also tunned in rc.conf jail_sysvipc_allow=YES I am still not able to start both at the same time. Any idea ? –– - Grégory Bernard Director - --- www.osnet.eu --- -- Your provider of OpenSource appliances -- –– OSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetO ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Shared Memory allocation in jail
Le 5 janv. 2012 à 14:56, bsd a écrit : Hi, I am trying to run both postgres and zabbix in the same jail and I am only able to start postgres or zabbix not both of them. I have tuned my sysctl on master host as follow : kern.ipc.shmmax=268435456 kern.ipc.shmall=409600 kern.ipc.semmap=256 security.jail.allow_raw_sockets=1 security.jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 security.jail.enforce_statfs=1 No special tunning on jail host. I have also tunned in rc.conf jail_sysvipc_allow=YES I am still not able to start both at the same time. Any idea ? Infos here were helpful : http://www.freebsddiary.org/jail-multiple.php I have • re-configure /boot/loader.conf • configured sysctl.conf with various options # rebooted and the issue was solved. –– - Grégory Bernard Director - --- www.osnet.eu --- -- Your provider of OpenSource appliances -- –– OSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetO ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org –– - Grégory Bernard Director - --- www.osnet.eu --- -- Your provider of OpenSource appliances -- –– OSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetO ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Shared Memory allocation in jail
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 8:56 AM, bsd b...@todoo.biz wrote: Hi, I am trying to run both postgres and zabbix in the same jail and I am only able to start postgres or zabbix not both of them. Yeah bro, it bit me in the ass as well ;-) the SysV IPC is common for the whole system. So anything that uses IPC in jails will have to go through this process You have to change the Pg user's id and the chown the Pg files. I use a nomeclature for this and is the last 3 digits of the jail's IP and the original uid. Example The jail on 192.168.101.124 has a Pg user of 70124 for port NATing I use the contrary nomenclature like 12480 is the network port 80 of the same jail in th public IP as 12480. Anyway here is my recipe: pw usermod pgsql -u 70124 pw groupmod pgsql -g 70124 chown -R pgsql /usr/local/pgsql/ chgrp -R pgsql /usr/local/pgsql/ When you run ipcs from the jail You should the see something like the example below, where there is still one Pg on uid 70 but from the jail's perspective it's the pgsql user who now has uid of 70124 Message Queues: T ID KEY MODEOWNERGROUP Shared Memory: T ID KEY MODEOWNERGROUP m 1179648 5432001 --rw--- 70 70 m 1310730 --rw--- 70 70 m 1572866 5432002 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql Semaphores: T ID KEY MODEOWNERGROUP s 1703936 5432001 --rw--- 70 70 s 1703937 5432002 --rw--- 70 70 s 1703938 5432003 --rw--- 70 70 s 1572867 5432004 --rw--- 70 70 s 1572868 5432005 --rw--- 70 70 s 1572869 5432006 --rw--- 70 70 s 1572870 5432007 --rw--- 70 70 s 1179655 5432008 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql s 1179656 5432009 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql s 1179657 5432010 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql s 1179658 5432011 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql s 1179659 5432012 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql s 1179660 5432013 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql s 1179661 5432014 --rw--- pgsqlpgsql Cheers, -- Alejandro Imass ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Opera: X Shared memory extension is not available. ZPixmap not supported
On Thu, 14 May 2009 09:03:25 + (GMT) Saifi Khan saifi.k...@twincling.org wrote: Running Opera 9.64 on X.org 7.4 leads to freeze ups in Opera. The error reported is Opera: X Shared memory extension is not available. ZPixmap not supported My system is Intel CeleronM 1.6GHz, Intel 945GM mobo. I get this message too, it is just a note stating a feature of X is missing to support ZPixmap properly so Opera will not use it. I have not seen any big problems with Opera for years, so maybe you have got some faulty hardware or other configuration issues. Also please try to correct your time / time zone settings, all your mails are arriving from the future. Andreas -- GnuPG key : 0x2A573565|http://www.gnupg.org/howtos/de/ Fingerprint: 925D 2089 0BF9 8DE5 9166 33BB F0FD CD37 2A57 3565 pgpMqnCp5TrSJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Opera: X Shared memory extension is not available. ZPixmap not supported
Hi all: Running Opera 9.64 on X.org 7.4 leads to freeze ups in Opera. The error reported is Opera: X Shared memory extension is not available. ZPixmap not supported My system is Intel CeleronM 1.6GHz, Intel 945GM mobo. Some of the blogs seem to suggest that the new driver shipped has fixed the issue. Does anybody know ? Is there a recommended work around ? thanks Saifi. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: PostgreSQL on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 with more than 2GB shared memory
Hell, Robert wrote: I just found a bug report for that issue: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=121423cat= Try asking on current@ - I think there were some patches available some time ago. -Original Message- From: Wojciech Puchar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2008 18:30 To: Hell, Robert Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 with more than 2GB shared memory fails again with ENOMEM. Is there any easy way to use a shared memory segment which is larger than 2GB? getting two smaller ? :) no idea - maybe it's bug of SHM. as you already checked it please do sent-pr ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
PostgreSQL on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 with more than 2GB shared memory
Hi,
I'm trying to run PostgreSQL 8.3 on a FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 server with more
than 2GB shared memory. The machine has 32GB RAM installed.
After setting kern.ipc.shmmax and kern.ipc.shmall to the appropriate
values, I still had no chance to start postgres with more than 2GB of
shared memory.
I wrote a small test which does the same as postgres: shmget and shmat:
#include sys/ipc.h
#include sys/shm.h
#include stdio.h
#include errno.h
int main()
{
int shmid, memKey = 1;
void *memAddress;
unsigned long size = 2147483648UL;
shmid = shmget(memKey, size, IPC_CREAT | IPC_EXCL);
if (shmid 0) {
printf(shmget failed: %d\n, errno);
return 1;
}
memAddress = shmat(shmid, NULL, 0);
if (memAddress == (void *) -1) {
printf(shmat failed: %d\n, errno);
}
return 0;
}
I found out that shmget failed with ENOMEM in shmget_allocate_segment
(sysv_shm.c) because of an overflow of size (requested shared memory in
bytes):
int i, segnum, shmid, size;
...
size = round_page(uap-size);
if (shm_committed + btoc(size) shminfo.shmall) {
return (ENOMEM);
}
When changing size to an unsigned long shmget works - but now shmat then
fails again with ENOMEM.
Is there any easy way to use a shared memory segment which is larger
than 2GB?
Kind regards,
Robert
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PostgreSQL on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 with more than 2GB shared memory
fails again with ENOMEM. Is there any easy way to use a shared memory segment which is larger than 2GB? getting two smaller ? :) no idea - maybe it's bug of SHM. as you already checked it please do sent-pr ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: PostgreSQL on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 with more than 2GB shared memory
I just found a bug report for that issue: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=121423cat= Thanks, Robert -Original Message- From: Wojciech Puchar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2008 18:30 To: Hell, Robert Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL on FreeBSD 7.0 amd64 with more than 2GB shared memory fails again with ENOMEM. Is there any easy way to use a shared memory segment which is larger than 2GB? getting two smaller ? :) no idea - maybe it's bug of SHM. as you already checked it please do sent-pr ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rmuser error - shared memory
Thanks very much Bill and James. Hana vs hanka is only typo at this mail (hana is correct, as it is in my box). I apologize for this incorrect information. Bill, you are right, the kernel was build without shared memory support. Option SYSVSHM is not included in the kernel. As I cannot recompile the kernel on this production server now, can be there any impact on instability of my system with missing SYSVSHM option? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Moran Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 6:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Lubomir Matousek; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (no subject) James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 09:11 +0100, Lubomir Matousek wrote: Dear list, I have the following problem when using rmuser (freebsd 6.2) -- rmuser -v hana Matching password entry: hana:*:1091:1092::0:0:/usr/home/hana:/usr/sbin/nologin Is this the entry you wish to remove? yes Remove user's home directory (/usr/home/hanka)? yes Removing crontab for (hana):. Removing at(1) jobs owned by (hana): 0 removed. Removing IPC mechanismsipcs: sysctlbyname: kern.ipc.shmmax: No such file or directory ipcs: sysctlbyname: kern.ipc.shmmax: No such file or directory ipcs: sysctlbyname: kern.ipc.shmmax: No such file or directory . Terminating all processes owned by (hana): -KILL signal sent to 0 processes. Removing files owned by (hana) in /tmp: 0 removed. Removing files owned by (hana) in /var/tmp: 0 removed. Removing mail spool(s) for (hana): /var/mail/hana. Removing user (hana) (including home directory) from the system: Done. --- The problem started, when I accidentaly deleted /usr/home directory and I had to create a new one. I checked /etc/password file and the direcory existed before using rmuser. Can anybody help please? Lubos Looks like the problem is that somewhere within there it's expected that the home directory isn't /usr/home/hana, it's /usr/home/hanka Have you checked /etc/master.passwd to make sure that there's no mis-entry in there? Or just try creating /usr/home/hanka and see if it works itself out. Personally, I'm unsure where the problem is. The only suspicious thing I see is the inability to remove shared memory segments, which is a bit strange but not wholly unexpected. Did you build a kernel without shared memory? -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT: VIA-EK disabling shared memory
Hi: I got a VIA EPIA-EK board which has some advanced settings for graphics, you can toggle how much shared memory to allocate for graphics. Nice, but my device won't have a display so I'd like not to allocate any. There is an option for disabling shared memory, but then the system won't boot. It hangs and I can't even enter the bios. So, I guess I have to find the magic combination with other options. The manual only lists the options and recommends not to mess with them unless you know what you're doing. There is no mention on how to get the disable-shared-memory to work. Any one got a clue? Thanks, Erik -- Erik Nørgaard Ph: +34.666334818 http://www.locolomo.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Shared Memory and Xorg.
I tend to visit Opera's Desktop team blog to see what new features are going to be in the next release of the Opera browser. And one interesting tid-bit was: Added Shared X memory. Should now be quite a bit faster And beneath this note was: Note: On FreeBSD shared memory doesn't work by FreeBSD design. You need to run this as as root: # sysctl kern.ipc.shm_allow_removed=1 What exactly does this mean. And is X shared memory special shared memory in anyway? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL Shared Memory and Semaphors
Hello, I want to increase the max_connections of PostgreSQL from around 40 to around 100. For this I need to change the Shared Memory and Semaphores settings. I followed this link - http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/kernel-resources.html#SYSVIPC and used the proposed values in a test installation FreeBSD 5.5, PostgreSQL 8.x, with 96 MB RAM (a VMware guest) - I added - kern.ipc.shmall=32768 kern.ipc.shmmax=134217728 kern.ipc.semmap=256 to /etc/sysctl.conf kern.ipc.semmni=256 kern.ipc.semmns=512 kern.ipc.semmnu=256 to /boot/loader.conf And I changed max_connections = 40 to 100 in postgresql.conf. Rebooted and all works OK. Now I want to do the same on a production machine FreeBSD 5.4, PostgreSQL 8.x, with 2 GB RAM. Are there any dangers I should have in mind? Thank you, Iv PS I know that the values can be compiled into the kernel, but I am not that good yet. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Shared Memory?
B. Cook wrote: Hello All, I'm not a programmer and nor do I play one in real life.. :) I've recently setup a DansGuardian box for someone and I had some interesting things happen. When the box would get under load (500+ simultaneout connections) it would load up the cpu: last pid: 69931; load averages: 4.73, 3.56, 3.32 up 5+11:10:58 09:56:31 49 processes: 8 running, 41 sleeping Mem: 157M Active, 202M Inact, 106M Wired, 20M Cache, 60M Buf, 8168K Free Swap: 2048M Total, 32K Used, 2048M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATETIME WCPU COMMAND 49814 guardian1 1200 85868K 85160K RUN 0:01 14.87% dansguardian 30132 guardian1 1200 85868K 85180K RUN 0:22 14.11% dansguardian 52245 guardian1 1190 85860K 85168K RUN 0:06 13.94% dansguardian 23445 guardian1 1200 85896K 85208K RUN 0:22 13.87% dansguardian at this time there were 10 dansguardian processes running. the default config suggests 120 to start off with.. (doing that crashed the box in about 5 minutes) I found one thing that seemed to help: kern.ipc.shm_use_phys=1 from man tuning. after setting the sysctl value the system now looks like this: last pid: 40265; load averages: 0.29, 0.29, 0.27 up 7+17:55:46 16:41:47 34 processes: 1 running, 33 sleeping CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.7% system, 1.5% interrupt, 97.8% idle Mem: 125M Active, 249M Inact, 98M Wired, 16M Cache, 60M Buf, 4392K Free Swap: 2048M Total, 36K Used, 2048M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATETIME WCPU COMMAND 6266 guardian1 960 76116K 18004K select 0:05 12.54% dansguardian 696 guardian1 960 76112K 16960K select 0:01 0.81% dansguardian 8969 guardian1 960 76112K 6036K select 0:00 0.12% dansguardian 21017 squid 1 960 31228K 26684K select 41:52 0.00% squid After searching I can't seem to find out when it's appropriate (or not) to set this and if anything else should be set in conjunction with it. Other than the fact that this helped.. can anyone point me in a direction or tell me why it helped? collecting pv entries -- suggest increasing PMAP_SHPGPERPROC collecting pv entries -- suggest increasing PMAP_SHPGPERPROC this error is what somewhat lead me to this discovery. And in hoping to fix that it suggested recompling the kernel with those values changed.. NOTES tells me that that value is now 201, google has people with numbers all over the place.. and I still can't seem to figure out why they did it. egrep -v # /etc/sysctl.conf security.bsd.see_other_uids=0 net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 net.inet.ip.random_id=1 kern.randompid=1 kern.coredump=0 kern.ipc.shmmax=536870912 kern.ipc.shm_use_phys=1 This is a stock 6.1 GENERIC kernel The box is a router for internet traffic that passes several gigs of data from about 2500+ users. Its a small 866 w/ 512M of ram and as previously stated running DansGuardian (www/dansguardian) and squid (www/squid). I've asked a few times for information on the DG list, but I guess it's mainly a linux only crowd as I did not hear anything back from anyone. netstat -m 260/2155/2415 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) 258/1264/1522/17088 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 258/1210 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache) 0/0/0/0 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 0/0/0/0 9k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 0/0/0/0 16k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 581K/3066K/3647K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total) 56061/494261/470674 requests for mbufs denied (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters denied (4k/9k/16k) 0/9/4528 sfbufs in use (current/peak/max) 0 requests for sfbufs denied 0 requests for sfbufs delayed 12 requests for I/O initiated by sendfile 328 calls to protocol drain routines They want me to move it a larger box just for the sake of putting it on a larger box.. (2.2G Xeon w/ 2G ram) but I'd like to tune it better.. as opposed to just throw hardware at it and hope for the best. all data/packets passes over lo.. lo0 16384 127 127.0.0.1 57055828 - 33798613 - - and the box so far has been up for 7 days. Any information helping me understand this beast would be greatly appreciated. - Brian This thread talks a little bit about how to choose an appropriate size for PMAP_SHPGPERPROC in regards to Apache - it might be adapted to work with DG: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2003-May/000695.html I snooped through the code a little, but am not familiar enough with FreeBSD's guts to understand what pv_entries are other than they have something to do with paged memory Hope that link helps some, Micah ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
Shared Memory?
Hello All, I'm not a programmer and nor do I play one in real life.. :) I've recently setup a DansGuardian box for someone and I had some interesting things happen. When the box would get under load (500+ simultaneout connections) it would load up the cpu: last pid: 69931; load averages: 4.73, 3.56, 3.32 up 5+11:10:58 09:56:31 49 processes: 8 running, 41 sleeping Mem: 157M Active, 202M Inact, 106M Wired, 20M Cache, 60M Buf, 8168K Free Swap: 2048M Total, 32K Used, 2048M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATETIME WCPU COMMAND 49814 guardian1 1200 85868K 85160K RUN 0:01 14.87% dansguardian 30132 guardian1 1200 85868K 85180K RUN 0:22 14.11% dansguardian 52245 guardian1 1190 85860K 85168K RUN 0:06 13.94% dansguardian 23445 guardian1 1200 85896K 85208K RUN 0:22 13.87% dansguardian at this time there were 10 dansguardian processes running. the default config suggests 120 to start off with.. (doing that crashed the box in about 5 minutes) I found one thing that seemed to help: kern.ipc.shm_use_phys=1 from man tuning. after setting the sysctl value the system now looks like this: last pid: 40265; load averages: 0.29, 0.29, 0.27 up 7+17:55:46 16:41:47 34 processes: 1 running, 33 sleeping CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.7% system, 1.5% interrupt, 97.8% idle Mem: 125M Active, 249M Inact, 98M Wired, 16M Cache, 60M Buf, 4392K Free Swap: 2048M Total, 36K Used, 2048M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATETIME WCPU COMMAND 6266 guardian1 960 76116K 18004K select 0:05 12.54% dansguardian 696 guardian1 960 76112K 16960K select 0:01 0.81% dansguardian 8969 guardian1 960 76112K 6036K select 0:00 0.12% dansguardian 21017 squid 1 960 31228K 26684K select 41:52 0.00% squid After searching I can't seem to find out when it's appropriate (or not) to set this and if anything else should be set in conjunction with it. Other than the fact that this helped.. can anyone point me in a direction or tell me why it helped? collecting pv entries -- suggest increasing PMAP_SHPGPERPROC collecting pv entries -- suggest increasing PMAP_SHPGPERPROC this error is what somewhat lead me to this discovery. And in hoping to fix that it suggested recompling the kernel with those values changed.. NOTES tells me that that value is now 201, google has people with numbers all over the place.. and I still can't seem to figure out why they did it. egrep -v # /etc/sysctl.conf security.bsd.see_other_uids=0 net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 net.inet.ip.random_id=1 kern.randompid=1 kern.coredump=0 kern.ipc.shmmax=536870912 kern.ipc.shm_use_phys=1 This is a stock 6.1 GENERIC kernel The box is a router for internet traffic that passes several gigs of data from about 2500+ users. Its a small 866 w/ 512M of ram and as previously stated running DansGuardian (www/dansguardian) and squid (www/squid). I've asked a few times for information on the DG list, but I guess it's mainly a linux only crowd as I did not hear anything back from anyone. netstat -m 260/2155/2415 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) 258/1264/1522/17088 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 258/1210 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache) 0/0/0/0 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 0/0/0/0 9k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 0/0/0/0 16k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 581K/3066K/3647K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total) 56061/494261/470674 requests for mbufs denied (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters denied (4k/9k/16k) 0/9/4528 sfbufs in use (current/peak/max) 0 requests for sfbufs denied 0 requests for sfbufs delayed 12 requests for I/O initiated by sendfile 328 calls to protocol drain routines They want me to move it a larger box just for the sake of putting it on a larger box.. (2.2G Xeon w/ 2G ram) but I'd like to tune it better.. as opposed to just throw hardware at it and hope for the best. all data/packets passes over lo.. lo0 16384 127 127.0.0.1 57055828 - 33798613 - - and the box so far has been up for 7 days. Any information helping me understand this beast would be greatly appreciated. - Brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: shared memory settings in 5.3
Thank you for the quick reply. That was very helpful. I thought I'd post what I found out for the next poor knob setting up sybase; The default setting of SHMMAXPGS appears to be 8192. Default page size is 4K, which gives you the 33554432 kern.ipc.shmmax value from sysctl. This means (if my math is right) you have 32mg of shared memory to allow sybase to grab. This is fine for the default sybase install (7500 2k pgs). I set 'options SHMMAXPGS=40960' in my recompiled kernel, which gives me a kern.ipc.shmmax 160 megs. This allowd me to set sybase's 'total memory' at 80,000 (2k pages) giving me just under 160 megs of memory available for data caches, which sybase is able to use at great advantage when the circumstances are right... J I have seen references to setting SHMMAXPGS, but am not quite sure how to set this or what units it is currently set in now. This is set in your kernel configuration file. Check GENERIC and NOTES for the default settings. See the handbook for more help on building a kernel. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: shared memory settings in 5.3
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 01:52:20PM -0800, John wrote: Hello, I am setting up sybase 11 to run on 5.3 release and want to increase the available shared memory for sybase to use but am unsure how to do this. I have seen references to setting SHMMAXPGS, but am not quite sure how to set this or what units it is currently set in now. Any help would be greatly appreciated. This is set in your kernel configuration file. Check GENERIC and NOTES for the default settings. See the handbook for more help on building a kernel. Kris pgpKcR3aM3NJe.pgp Description: PGP signature
shared memory settings in 5.3
Hello, I am setting up sybase 11 to run on 5.3 release and want to increase the available shared memory for sybase to use but am unsure how to do this. I have seen references to setting SHMMAXPGS, but am not quite sure how to set this or what units it is currently set in now. Any help would be greatly appreciated. J __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
shared memory
Greetings, I have acquired a mo/bo with a built-in video adapter. Being that I have 768 megs of ram, I _know_ I have plenty of memory to allot to video. BIOS doesn't pass this on to FreeBSD. I have two choices for x. I can use the VESA standard or I can use the S3 video driver (both come up fine, but theres quit a bit of chop when it comes to video processing regardless of which I use). I'm bringing up VESA from the kernal and it's giving it 16 megs of ram. Where can I read up on, or how can I increase this allotment? As for the S3 video driver, do I allot the memory from the kernal or is this somehow set up from the x configuration file? (I'm running x.org, although that probably shouldn't matter being that they pretty much seem the same at this point). Applicable nfo as follows: (from dmesg -a) Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) Processor (1202.73-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = AuthenticAMD Id = 0x644 Stepping = 4 Features=0x183f9ffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PA T,PSE36,MMX,FXSR AMD Features=0xc044RSVD,AMIE,DSP,3DNow! real memory = 788463616 (769984K bytes) avail memory = 760496128 (742672K bytes) Preloaded elf module vesa.ko at 0xc066d140. ...snip... VESA: v3.0, 16384k memory, flags:0x1, mode table:0xc00c0e2a (ce2a) VESA: S3 Incorporated. Savage4 ...snip... agp0: VIA 82C8363 (Apollo KT133A) host to PCI bridge mem 0xd800-0xdbff at device 0.0 on pci0 pcib1: VIA 8363 (Apollo KT133) PCI-PCI (AGP) bridge at device 1.0 on pci0 pci1: PCI bus on pcib1 pci1: S3 model 8a26 graphics accelerator at 0.0 irq 9 ...snip... sc0: System console at flags 0x100 on isa0 sc0: VGA 16 virtual consoles, flags=0x300 vga0: Generic ISA VGA at port 0x3c0-0x3df iomem 0xa-0xb on isa0 ...snip... (from /sys/i386/conf/WIZARD, comments removed for cleaner reading) cpu I686_CPU ident WIZARD maxusers132 options CPU_ATHLON_SSE_HACK options CPU_ENABLE_SSE ...snip... options USER_LDT options SHMALL=32768 options SHMMAX=67108864 options VESA ...snip... device sc0 at isa? flags 0x100 device vga0at isa? device agp ...snip... From what I've read on it, I can tell you that I'm completely lost when it comes to shared memory (and reading more seems to confuse me more). I simply don't understand how it works. Of course, I know that built in video is recommended against (regardless of what OS is running), but I'm sure there's a way to up the memory... And I hope that theres a place that explains how it works in laymens terms? :) So far, I've re-read the manual on setting up x, for setting up video applications, various video app manuals, LINT, and many googles on shared memory. Mayhaps there's a man page I'm missing that puts all this stuff in perspective? If not, someone explain it so I can write one. :) Thanks. Mike ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: shared memory
Mike Hauber wrote: I have acquired a mo/bo with a built-in video adapter. Being that I have 768 megs of ram, I _know_ I have plenty of memory to allot to video. BIOS doesn't pass this on to FreeBSD. [ ... ] I'm bringing up VESA from the kernal and it's giving it 16 megs of ram. Where can I read up on, or how can I increase this allotment? I think you have an integrated video controller which uses main memory rather than having it's own dedicated VRAM. Look for an option in your BIOS config to adjust the size of the frame buffer. You should adjust the amount of memory reserved for video to enough to handle whatever screen depth you want to run at, there isn't much point to allocating any more. -- -Chuck ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: shared memory
On Thursday 28 October 2004 12:39 pm, Chuck Swiger proclaimed: Mike Hauber wrote: I have acquired a mo/bo with a built-in video adapter. Being that I have 768 megs of ram, I _know_ I have plenty of memory to allot to video. BIOS doesn't pass this on to FreeBSD. [ ... ] I'm bringing up VESA from the kernal and it's giving it 16 megs of ram. Where can I read up on, or how can I increase this allotment? I think you have an integrated video controller which uses main memory rather than having it's own dedicated VRAM. Look for an option in your BIOS config to adjust the size of the frame buffer. You should adjust the amount of memory reserved for video to enough to handle whatever screen depth you want to run at, there isn't much point to allocating any more. Whoa. I thought I had tried that, but apparently I didn't (or at least I couldn't have saved before restarting). Sorry. FreeBSD _does_ respect the allotment. Thanks. That's what I needed (besides a break). Regards, Mike ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
how to tell how much of shared memory is used?
ipcs -a tells me how much shared memory has been allocated to a process, but is there a way to tell how much of that allocated space is being used? Thanks, Adi ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
shared memory release...
Hi all, Ok, I am running a 4.7 FreeBSD box that is a web server running apache. It looks like some module that I have is leaking memory, and eventually, apache crashes on restarts becuase of this error : shmget() failed: No space left on device which means it can't get any more memory, which I understand. When I look at the top list, it shows me something like this : Mem: 140M Active, 879M Inact, 151M Wired, 181M Cache, 199M Buf, 660M Free But when you look at the processes that are still up, they hardly take up any memory. So, my question is this. Is there a way to free up Inactive memory from crashed processes ??? Without just rebooting the box ??? I know that I need to find the source of the leaking and crashing to begin with, but in the mean time, if it happens, I'd like to free up the memory manually, so I can get the box running again... Thanks, Tim. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: shared memory release...
Tim Traver wrote: Ok, I am running a 4.7 FreeBSD box that is a web server running apache. It looks like some module that I have is leaking memory, and eventually, apache crashes on restarts becuase of this error : shmget() failed: No space left on device which means it can't get any more memory, which I understand. SysV shared memory is a limited resource which has tunables you need to set or adjust in your kernel config file. It's not the same as physical RAM. When I look at the top list, it shows me something like this : Mem: 140M Active, 879M Inact, 151M Wired, 181M Cache, 199M Buf, 660M Free top is measuring something else, here. -- -Chuck ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2 gig shared memory
I am configuring a dual processor box with 4 gig of memory. One of the main applications I will be running is PostgreSQL. It uses SysV shared memory for its internal data pages. If I were to configure a 4.8 kernal to have 2 gig of SysV shared memory, will this cause problems. The remaining 2 gig of memory is more than sufficient for the rest of the programs that will be running on the machine. Kim -- Kim Shrier - principal, Shrier and Deihl - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Remote Unix Network Admin, Security, Internet Software Development Tinker Internet Services - Superior FreeBSD-based Web Hosting http://www.tinker.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2 gig shared memory
I will persue the configuration issue on the postgresql lists. However, what I was hoping to get an answer for on this list is, will FreeBSD belly up if I configure 2 gig of SysV shared memory. Thanks, Kim David Bear wrote: On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 04:31:56PM -0600, Kim Shrier wrote: I am configuring a dual processor box with 4 gig of memory. One of the main applications I will be running is PostgreSQL. It uses SysV shared memory for its internal data pages. If I were to configure a 4.8 kernal to have 2 gig of SysV shared memory, will this cause problems. The remaining 2 gig of memory is more than sufficient for the rest of the programs that will be running on the machine. you really should ask the postgresql users list on this one. As I recall there were a set of diminishing returns the kick in as SHMEM gets big -- -- Kim Shrier - principal, Shrier and Deihl - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Remote Unix Network Admin, Security, Internet Software Development Tinker Internet Services - Superior FreeBSD-based Web Hosting http://www.tinker.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Apache and shared memory
When people talk about optimizing mod_perl shared memory, they are not referring to System V type shared memory as seen by ipcs. They are talking about memory shared by virtue of a process fork - this is effectively read only memory. The net effect is that a process may appear to be 20 meg, but may only use 2 or 3 meg, say. It has been difficult to monitor 'unshared' memory use in FreeBSD as freebsd has traditionally reported via getrusage() as an 'integrated' unshared memory use which is more related to the old school process accounting than it is to the actual unshared memory use - this may have changed in -CURRENT or recent -STABLEs. Linux reports the unshared memory directly via gtop which is a lot more convenient. I wish (hint hint) that there was a sysctl to handle this... There are other tricks you can do to maximize memory use, such as putting the php and perl servers, and image servers on separate apache processes, and proxying between them, rather than running php and mod_perl on the same server, and adjusting the (Min/Max)SpareServers to reap apache process during quieter times. The main thing to do with mod_perl is to pre-load all of the perl modules during apache startup so that the modules are shared rather than being loaded separately into each apache process. http://perl.apache.org has some excellent documentation about this. Also Apache::SizeLimit can be useful for mod_perl based systems. Tuning apache can be a lot of... fun! Hope this helps, - Mike H. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Apache and shared memory
We are running a reasonably busy web site on FreeBSD (100K-200K hits per day); we have split the database server (MySQL on FreeBSD 4.3) apart from the web server (Apache on FreeBSD 5.0 now). Both running i386 versions (Athlon CPUs). Things generally work very well, but ongoing memory usage is a concern. We have to run both mod_perl and mod_php, and the resulting memory usage is in the 10-20 MB range per httpd process. (The mod_php seems especially leaky with respect to memory.) So on our 1 GB web server, it's pretty risky running more than 50 httpd processes. I keep reading about optimizing mod_perl shared memory, and yet it seems I am missing an essential piece, as it looks like the system is not using shared memory at all: # ipcs -m Shared Memory: T ID KEYMODE OWNERGROUP # sysctl -a | grep shm kern.ipc.shmmax: 33554432 kern.ipc.shmmin: 1 kern.ipc.shmmni: 192 kern.ipc.shmseg: 128 kern.ipc.shmall: 8192 kern.ipc.shm_use_phys: 0 shm 116K 16K1 16384 # This is running with the GENERIC kernel, which appears to have shared memory enabled. Using the precompiled Apache 1.3.27 port from freebsd.org. So it appears that I somehow need to tell Apache that I want to use shared memory, before I even try to optimize mod_perl. And yet I can't find any appropriate directives. Can anyone suggest what I am missing? I can only add another 512 MB to the machine before the add-more-physical-memory approach runs out. Thanks ... Tom Haapanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
