Re: dump/restore - individual file

2011-08-24 Thread jirib
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:22:15 -0500
Stefan Johnson tigerphoenixdra...@gmail.com wrote:

  # restore -xf root.dump './etc/pf.conf'
  restore: ./etc: File exists
  You have not read any tapes yet.
  Unless you know which volume your file(s) are on you should start
  with the last volume and work towards the first.
  Specify next volume #:
 
  And here I'm failing, why volume?
 
  Thank you for tips.
 
  jirib
 
 
 I believe restore with -x flag always asks for which volume, even if
 it is just a dump to a file.  Just tell it to use volume 1 (type 1
 then hit enter.)
 
 Also, I notice in your dump example, you dumped the raw device.
 You can just tell it to use / instead, and it will dump just fine
 as well.

Hi,

it would be nice if `restore' would know if it is restoring from a file
or from a tape. Even `-s 1' doesn't supress prompting for volume number.

This is from AIX man page:

-s SeekBackup   Specifies the backup to seek and restore on a
multiple-backup tape archive. The -s flag is only applicable when the
archive is written to a tape device. To use the -s flag properly, a
no-rewind-on-close and no-retension-on-open tape device, such
as /dev/rmt0.1 or /dev/rmt0.5, must be specified. If the -s flag is
specified with a rewind tape device, the restore command displays an
error message and exits with a nonzero return code. If a no-rewind tape
device is used and the -s flag is not specified, a default value of -s
1 is used. The value of the SeekBackup parameter must be in the range
of 1 to 100 inclusive. It is necessary to use a no-rewind-on-close,
no-retension-on-open tape device because of the behavior of the -s
flag. The value specified with -s is relative to the position of the
tapes read/write head and not to an archives position on the tape. For
example, to restore the first, second, and fourth backups from a
multiple-backup tape archive, the respective values for the -s flag
would be -s 1, -s 1, and -s 2.

I cannot do C so I cannot send a diff :(

jirib



Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Patrick Lamaiziere
Le Tue, 23 Aug 2011 19:21:32 +0200,
Per-Olov SjC6holm p...@incedo.org a C)crit :

Hello,

  Here we reach 400 MBits/s with a CPU rate ~70% but we
  run OpenBSD 4.9.

 How fast is your CPU ?

cpu0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz, 2261.30 MHz
It's a Dell R610 with 4Go RAM.



xpdf slow

2011-08-24 Thread igor denisov
Hello there,

May someone help me with the following.

My xpdf is very slow on pdf files from www.archive.org.
pdf is attached.

xpdfrc

#

#- display fonts

# These map the Base-14 fonts to the Type 1 fonts that ship with
# ghostscript.  You'll almost certainly want to use something like
# this, but you'll need to adjust this to point to wherever
# ghostscript is installed on your system.  (But if the fonts are
# installed in a standard location, xpdf will find them
# automatically.)

displayFontT1   /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/
displayFontT1   /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled
displayFontT1
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled
displayFontT1 Times-Roman
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021003l.pfb
displayFontT1 Times-Italic
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021023l.pfb
displayFontT1 Times-Bold
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021004l.pfb
displayFontT1 Times-BoldItalic
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021024l.pfb
displayFontT1 Helvetica
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019003l.pfb
displayFontT1 Helvetica-Oblique
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019023l.pfb
displayFontT1 Helvetica
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019003l.pfb
displayFontT1 Helvetica-Oblique
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019023l.pfb
displayFontT1 Helvetica-Bold
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019004l.pfb
displayFontT1 Helvetica-BoldOblique
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019024l.pfb
displayFontT1 Courier
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022003l.pfb
displayFontT1 Courier-Oblique
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022023l.pfb
displayFontT1 Courier-Bold
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022004l.pfb
displayFontT1 Courier-BoldOblique
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022024l.pfb
displayFontT1 Symbol
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/s05l.pfb
displayFontT1 ZapfDingbats
/usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/d05l.pfb
displayFontT1   /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/

# If you need to display PDF files that refer to non-embedded fonts,
# you should add one or more fontDir options to point to the
# directories containing the font files.  Xpdf will only look at .pfa,
# .pfb, and .ttf files in those directories (other files will simply
# be ignored).

#fontDir/usr/local/fonts/bakoma

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pdf which had a name of 
appliedgeophysic00rast.pdf]



Re: CDDL vs GPL and maybe some implications for BSD?

2011-08-24 Thread Steve Shockley

On 8/23/2011 11:17 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:

Who are these ZFS and dtrace people? Are they HFT programmers?  I
really don't know.  Do they help the project?  I can assure you that
they do not.


Perhaps they want to use dtrace to find out where their ZFS data went...



Re: xpdf slow

2011-08-24 Thread Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:09 AM, igor denisov saufe...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello there,

 May someone help me with the following.

 My xpdf is very slow on pdf files from www.archive.org.
 pdf is attached.

 xpdfrc

 #

 #- display fonts

 # These map the Base-14 fonts to the Type 1 fonts that ship with
 # ghostscript. B You'll almost certainly want to use something like
 # this, but you'll need to adjust this to point to wherever
 # ghostscript is installed on your system. B (But if the fonts are
 # installed in a standard location, xpdf will find them
 # automatically.)

 displayFontT1 B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B 
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/
 displayFontT1 B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B 
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled
 displayFontT1
 /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled
 displayFontT1 Times-Roman
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021003l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Times-Italic
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021023l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Times-Bold
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021004l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Times-BoldItalic
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n021024l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Helvetica
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019003l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Helvetica-Oblique
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019023l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Helvetica
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019003l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Helvetica-Oblique
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019023l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Helvetica-Bold
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019004l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Helvetica-BoldOblique
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n019024l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Courier
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022003l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Courier-Oblique
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022023l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Courier-Bold
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022004l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Courier-BoldOblique
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/n022024l.pfb
 displayFontT1 Symbol
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/s05l.pfb
 displayFontT1 ZapfDingbats
 /usr/local/share/ghostscript/fonts/d05l.pfb
 displayFontT1 B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B 
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/

 # If you need to display PDF files that refer to non-embedded fonts,
 # you should add one or more fontDir options to point to the
 # directories containing the font files. B Xpdf will only look at .pfa,
 # .pfb, and .ttf files in those directories (other files will simply
 # be ignored).

 #fontDir B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B /usr/local/fonts/bakoma

 [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pdf which had a name
of appliedgeophysic00rast.pdf]



xpdf is always slow :P

unrelated: have you tried zathura?, it's in ports, it seems a whole lot
faster
to me...



Re: CDDL vs GPL and maybe some implications for BSD?

2011-08-24 Thread Tomas Bodzar
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Steve Shockley
steve.shock...@shockley.net wrote:
 On 8/23/2011 11:17 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:

 Who are these ZFS and dtrace people? Are they HFT programmers? B I
 really don't know. B Do they help the project? B I can assure you that
 they do not.

 Perhaps they want to use dtrace to find out where their ZFS data went...

Heh. Nice one :-)

Anyway maybe I used really bad wording. With ZFS and Dtrace I meant
only that that there were couple of threads in misc@ when people asked
for support of it and because of that new approach of Joyent to
GPL/CDDL it seems possible in theory (not that we want it or need it).
Regarding filesystems I like Hammer FS more ;-) . My post was meant
completely licenses related. Because I just don't think that it's
possible to mix CDDL with GPL in that way or even BSD with CDDL (thx
to some patent related parts of that license.

There's couple of projects which started from OpenSolaris code, but
all of them are under CDDL which was created by Sun and Oracle get all
of it. Maybe if some of those projects will be enough popular (more
then Oracle stuff) then Oracle will step in with suits. At least CDDL
sounds like good weapon for that for me.



Re: xpdf slow

2011-08-24 Thread Amit Kulkarni
 xpdf is always slow :P

 unrelated: have you tried zathura?, it's in ports, it seems a whole lot
 faster
 to me...


or mupdf, my current favorite.



Re: xpdf slow

2011-08-24 Thread a . velichinsky
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 08:09:00AM -0400, igor denisov wrote:
 Hello there,
 
 May someone help me with the following.
 
 My xpdf is very slow on pdf files from www.archive.org.

That is to be expected. Get the djvu files instead.

There is no way to /decently/ use big image pdf files like those, even
with acrobat reader and on the latest hardware.



Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Per-Olov Sjöholm
On 24 aug 2011, at 12:01, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
 Le Tue, 23 Aug 2011 19:21:32 +0200,
 Per-Olov SjC6holm p...@incedo.org a C)crit :

 Hello,

 Here we reach 400 MBits/s with a CPU rate ~70% but we
 run OpenBSD 4.9.

 How fast is your CPU ?

 cpu0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27GHz, 2261.30 MHz
 It's a Dell R610 with 4Go RAM.



Maybe that is normal then (if we have similar quality on NICs, tuning and RAM)
that I reach 400Mbit at 100% with one dedicated Xeon 5504 2GHz core.
(I have two Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU  E5504  @ 2.00GHz stepping 05)

You run on a physical server, right? As I run on a virtual server with near
similar performance and a slower CPU it seems I have very good performance.
It's hard for me to try faster CPUs just for fun as they are VERY expensive
with faster ones...

/Per-Olov



src build failure in -current (23.08)

2011-08-24 Thread Rares Aioanei
Hello all, 

I wanted to update my -current, running in VirtualBox, and after a while it 
stopped with 

=== usr.bin/write
install -c -S -s  -o root -g tty  -m 2555 write /usr/bin/write
install -c -o root -g bin -m 444  /usr/src/usr.bin/write/write.1 
/usr/share/man/man1/write.1
=== usr.bin/x99token
install -c -S -s  -o root -g bin  -m 555 x99token /usr/bin/x99token
install -c -o root -g bin -m 444  /usr/src/usr.bin/x99token/x99token.1 
/usr/share/man/man1/x99token.1
=== usr.bin/xargs
install -c -S -s  -o root -g bin  -m 555 xargs /usr/bin/xargs
install -c -o root -g bin -m 444  /usr/src/usr.bin/xargs/xargs.1 
/usr/share/man/man1/xargs.1
=== usr.bin/xinstall
install -c -s -o root -g bin  -m 555 xinstall /usr/bin/install
install -c -o root -g bin -m 444  /usr/src/usr.bin/xinstall/install.1 
/usr/share/man/man1/install.1
install: Permission denied
*** Error code 1 
Stop in /usr/src/usr.bin/xinstall:
 Exit status 1 (/usr/share/man/man1/install.1, line 53 of 
/usr/share/mk/bsd.man.mk)
*** Error code 2 
Stop in /usr/src/usr.bin:
 Exit status 2 (realinstall, line 48 of /usr/share/mk/bsd.subdir.mk)
*** Error code 2 
Stop in /usr/src:
 Exit status 2 (realinstall, line 48 of /usr/share/mk/bsd.subdir.mk)
*** Error code 2 
Stop in /usr/src:
 Exit status 2 (build, line 79 of Makefile)

The steps I did were exacly as instructed in the FAQ, as for permissions, I'm 
building as root, so I don't know what the issue may be.

OpenBSD 5.0-current (GENERIC.MP) #3: Tue Aug 23 22:31:35 EEST 2011
r...@openbsdv.my.domain:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP
real mem = 334430208 (318MB)
avail mem = 311603200 (297MB)
mainbus0 at root
bios0 at mainbus0: SMBIOS rev. 2.5 @ 0xe1000 (5 entries)
bios0: vendor innotek GmbH version VirtualBox date 12/01/2006
bios0: innotek GmbH VirtualBox
acpi0 at bios0: rev 2
acpi0: sleep states S0 S5
acpi0: tables DSDT FACP APIC SSDT
acpi0: wakeup devices
acpitimer0 at acpi0: 3579545 Hz, 32 bits
acpimadt0 at acpi0 addr 0xfee0: PC-AT compat
cpu0 at mainbus0: apid 0 (boot processor)
cpu0: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5600+, 1005.54 MHz
cpu0: 
FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT,SSE3,NXE,FFXSR,LONG,3DNOW2,3DNOW
cpu0: 64KB 64b/line 2-way I-cache, 64KB 64b/line 2-way D-cache, 512KB 64b/line 
16-way L2 cache
cpu0: ITLB 32 4KB entries fully associative, 8 4MB entries fully associative
cpu0: DTLB 32 4KB entries fully associative, 8 4MB entries fully associative
cpu0: apic clock running at 1000MHz
cpu1 at mainbus0: apid 1 (application processor)
cpu1: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5600+, 1005.45 MHz
cpu1: 
FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT,SSE3,NXE,FFXSR,LONG,3DNOW2,3DNOW
cpu1: 64KB 64b/line 2-way I-cache, 64KB 64b/line 2-way D-cache, 512KB 64b/line 
16-way L2 cache
cpu1: ITLB 32 4KB entries fully associative, 8 4MB entries fully associative
cpu1: DTLB 32 4KB entries fully associative, 8 4MB entries fully associative
ioapic0 at mainbus0: apid 2 pa 0xfec0, version 11, 24 pins
ioapic0: misconfigured as apic 0, remapped to apid 2
acpiprt0 at acpi0: bus 0 (PCI0)
acpicpu0 at acpi0
acpicpu1 at acpi0
acpibat0 at acpi0: BAT0 not present
acpiac0 at acpi0: AC unit online
pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0
pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 Intel 82441FX rev 0x02
pcib0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 Intel 82371SB ISA rev 0x00
pciide0 at pci0 dev 1 function 1 Intel 82371AB IDE rev 0x01: DMA, channel 0 
configured to compatibility, channel 1 configured to compatibility
wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: VBOX HARDDISK
wd0: 128-sector PIO, LBA, 13312MB, 27262976 sectors
wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 2
atapiscsi0 at pciide0 channel 1 drive 0
scsibus0 at atapiscsi0: 2 targets
cd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: VBOX, CD-ROM, 1.0 ATAPI 5/cdrom removable
cd0(pciide0:1:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 2
vga1 at pci0 dev 2 function 0 InnoTek VirtualBox Graphics Adapter rev 0x00
wsdisplay0 at vga1 mux 1: console (80x25, vt100 emulation)
wsdisplay0: screen 1-5 added (80x25, vt100 emulation)
em0 at pci0 dev 3 function 0 Intel PRO/1000MT (82540EM) rev 0x02: apic 2 int 
19, address 08:00:27:af:14:89
InnoTek VirtualBox Guest Service rev 0x00 at pci0 dev 4 function 0 not 
configured
auich0 at pci0 dev 5 function 0 Intel 82801AA AC97 rev 0x01: apic 2 int 21, 
ICH AC97
cpu1: 
FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT,SSE3,NXE,FFXSR,LONG,3DNOW2,3DNOW
cpu1: 64KB 64b/line 2-way I-cache, 64KB 64b/line 2-way D-cache, 512KB 64b/line 
16-way L2 cache
cpu1: ITLB 32 4KB entries fully associative, 8 4MB entries fully associative
cpu1: DTLB 32 4KB entries fully associative, 8 4MB entries fully associative
ioapic0 at mainbus0: apid 2 pa 0xfec0, version 11, 24 pins
ioapic0: misconfigured as apic 0, remapped to apid 2
acpiprt0 at acpi0: bus 0 (PCI0)
acpicpu0 at acpi0
acpicpu1 at acpi0
acpibat0 at acpi0: BAT0 not present
acpiac0 

Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Per-Olov Sjöholm
On 23 aug 2011, at 19:30, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm p...@incedo.org wrote:
 On 23 aug 2011, at 10:54, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
 Le Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:49:47 +0200,
 Per-Olov SjC6holm p...@incedo.org a C)crit :

 Hello,
 Have not tried current, but will try current as soon as I can.
 Also... I will try to do some laborations with CPU speed of the core
 the OpenBSD virtual machine has. This to see how the interrupts and
 throughput is related to the CPU speed of the allocated core.

 It would be nice to know if current is better with Intel em(4) cards.
 because of this commit : http://freshbsd.org/2011/04/13/00/19/01

 Here we reach 400 MBits/s with a CPU rate ~70% but we
 run OpenBSD 4.9.

 Regards.



 How fast is your CPU ?

 Yes I can see the 1.254 commit with this came in after the 4.9 release that
I
 use. I can try to see if I can measure any performance gain with this
update.

 I will try this from aug 17...
 http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/os/OpenBSD/snapshots/i386/install50.iso

 Can't see that mirror here http://www.openbsd.org/ftp.html , it's
 better to use something more official


 I4ll get back

 [ YES !! More fun tests :D ]

 Regards
 Per-Olov





Have tried it now... I tried the 5.0 snapshot from aug 17 with the improved em
driver. Also tested with more allocated cores and the SMP kernel.

Result on 5.0 snapshot with improved em driver:

- SMP
worse. Really sucks! _Dramatically_ reduced throughput.

- One processor core (as most of my tests have used)
An improvement, but very little. Maybe 10% better


/Per-Olov



Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Tomas Bodzar
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Per-Olov SjC6holm p...@incedo.org wrote:
 On 23 aug 2011, at 19:30, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm p...@incedo.org wrote:
 On 23 aug 2011, at 10:54, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
 Le Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:49:47 +0200,
 Per-Olov SjC6holm p...@incedo.org a C)crit :

 Hello,
 Have not tried current, but will try current as soon as I can.
 Also... I will try to do some laborations with CPU speed of the core
 the OpenBSD virtual machine has. This to see how the interrupts and
 throughput is related to the CPU speed of the allocated core.

 It would be nice to know if current is better with Intel em(4) cards.
 because of this commit : http://freshbsd.org/2011/04/13/00/19/01

 Here we reach 400 MBits/s with a CPU rate ~70% but we
 run OpenBSD 4.9.

 Regards.



 How fast is your CPU ?

 Yes I can see the 1.254 commit with this came in after the 4.9 release
that
 I
 use. I can try to see if I can measure any performance gain with this
 update.

 I will try this from aug 17...
 http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/os/OpenBSD/snapshots/i386/install50.iso

 Can't see that mirror here http://www.openbsd.org/ftp.html , it's
 better to use something more official


 I4ll get back

 [ YES !! More fun tests :D ]

 Regards
 Per-Olov





 Have tried it now... I tried the 5.0 snapshot from aug 17 with the improved
em
 driver. Also tested with more allocated cores and the SMP kernel.

 Result on 5.0 snapshot with improved em driver:

 - SMP
 worse. Really sucks! _Dramatically_ reduced throughput.

Will be fine to see systat ; systat mbufs ; netstat -m ; vmstat -i and
compare them with previous version. Including dmesg (if something
changed in dmesg)


 - One processor core (as most of my tests have used)
 An improvement, but very little. Maybe 10% better

As stated in some of links and posts sent to you - SMP doesn't offer
better throughput/sped automatically. You need to test on i386
non-SMP/SMP and amd64 non-SMP/SMP to see what's best.



 /Per-Olov



check status of mpbios

2011-08-24 Thread Per-Olov Sjöholm
Hi

Is there a way to check status if the mpbios is enabled or disabled ? I
Checked man config, tried find and list in UKC
This is seen in a dmesg, but doesn't say if it's enabled or not...

--snip--
root@xanadu:~#dmesg |grep -i mpbios
mpbios0 at bios0: Intel MP Specification 1.4
mpbios0: bus 0 is type PCI
mpbios0: bus 1 is type ISA
root@xanadu:~#
--snip--


Can mpbios on or off affect network performance as mpbios play with
interrupts. Or is it only related to the assignment? If so... If the system
works without it (i.e mpbios disabled) are there any drawbacks to have it
disabled if the system works ok with AND without it?



/Per-Olov



Re: check status of mpbios

2011-08-24 Thread Lars Hansson
Use config:

[nembus]$ config -e -f /bsd
OpenBSD 4.9 (GENERIC) #671: Wed Mar  2 07:09:00 MST 2011
dera...@i386.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC
Enter 'help' for information
ukc find mpbios
352 mpbios0 at bios0 disable flags 0x0
ukc

Cheers,
Lars Hansson



Re: check status of mpbios

2011-08-24 Thread Lars Hansson
If you're running under KVM then ACPI shutdown will not work unless
you disable mpbios. I always disable it with KVM since I don't
allocate more than one CPU to a VM anyway. I haven't noticed any
performance problems or other issues with it disabled.

Cheers,
Lars Hansson



Re: check status of mpbios

2011-08-24 Thread Stefan Johnson
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm p...@incedo.org wrote:

 Hi

 Is there a way to check status if the mpbios is enabled or disabled ? I
 Checked man config, tried find and list in UKC


Booting a qemu instance with it enabled and again with it disabled shows the
following:

Enabled:
mpbios0 at bios0: Intel MP Specification 1.4
mpbios0: bus 0 is type ISA

Disabled:
mpbios at bios0 function 0x0 not configured

It looks like if you disable it, dmesg will indicate such.


Can mpbios on or off affect network performance as mpbios play with
 interrupts. Or is it only related to the assignment? If so... If the system
 works without it (i.e mpbios disabled) are there any drawbacks to have it
 disabled if the system works ok with AND without it?


I'm not sure why you would want to disable it.  I disable mine because I'm
running it in
qemu and the virtual machine apparently has a flaky mpbios.  The virtual
network
cards it presents never receive the DHCP response from the virtual DHCP
server with
it turned on, and I get watchdog time out errors.  Disabling it makes those
go away.

But again, that's on a virtual machine and not a production environment.
Maybe
someone else can speak to the wisdom of enabling/disabling it for your
scenario.


Stefan Johnson



Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Lars Hansson
If you want a comparison, I have run a small OpenBSD router under KVM
and it easily sustained 80Mbps. It was connected to a FastEthernet
switch so it couldnt actually go much higher. This was using the
emulated e1000 KVM device and OpenBSD 4.9 release with mpbios  iic
disabled (disabling iic removes some annoying boot messages). The KVM
server was a modest 3Ghz Core2 Duo with 4Gb RAM and a lot of other
VM's running.

Cheers,
Lars



Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread LeviaComm Networks

On 8/24/2011 11:31 AM, Lars Hansson wrote:

If you want a comparison, I have run a small OpenBSD router under KVM
and it easily sustained 80Mbps. It was connected to a FastEthernet
switch so it couldnt actually go much higher. This was using the
emulated e1000 KVM device and OpenBSD 4.9 release with mpbios  iic
disabled (disabling iic removes some annoying boot messages). The KVM
server was a modest 3Ghz Core2 Duo with 4Gb RAM and a lot of other
VM's running.

Cheers,
Lars





You might see a bit more performance by load-balancing across two or 
more VMs.  Where I work, we have a couple virtual routers / firewalls 
(these systems are internal-only so security on these machines isn't 
critical)
I found that having 2 VMs load balanced in CARP gave more performance 
than doubling the resources on a single system.  No tweaking was done on 
the systems which makes them much easier to maintain.  Plus we can spin 
up more to add additional throughput without any downtime


Recently we have added a few more firewalls to load balance with, each 
using the same configuration and adding performance to the cluster.  We 
are seeing diminishing returns on each firewall we add (Overhead due to 
pfsync, CARP, etc)


The VM host runs VMware ESXi on 16 GB RAM and 2 8-core Opterons (6128HE, 
2 Ghz) and has two 10-Gb network cards (inside and outside) and 2x 1 Gb 
cards (Management and inter-host network).  The VMs are configured with 
a single processor core and 256 Mb RAM and 3 Virtual Gb network cards 
(Inside, outside and pf-sync)




Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Per-Olov Sjöholm
On 24 aug 2011, at 19:13, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm p...@incedo.org wrote:
 On 23 aug 2011, at 19:30, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm p...@incedo.org wrote:
 On 23 aug 2011, at 10:54, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
 Le Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:49:47 +0200,
 Per-Olov SjC6holm p...@incedo.org a C)crit :

 Hello,
 Have not tried current, but will try current as soon as I can.
 Also... I will try to do some laborations with CPU speed of the core
 the OpenBSD virtual machine has. This to see how the interrupts and
 throughput is related to the CPU speed of the allocated core.

 It would be nice to know if current is better with Intel em(4) cards.
 because of this commit : http://freshbsd.org/2011/04/13/00/19/01

 Here we reach 400 MBits/s with a CPU rate ~70% but we
 run OpenBSD 4.9.

 Regards.



 How fast is your CPU ?

 Yes I can see the 1.254 commit with this came in after the 4.9 release
that
 I
 use. I can try to see if I can measure any performance gain with this
 update.

 I will try this from aug 17...
 http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/os/OpenBSD/snapshots/i386/install50.iso

 Can't see that mirror here http://www.openbsd.org/ftp.html , it's
 better to use something more official


 I4ll get back

 [ YES !! More fun tests :D ]

 Regards
 Per-Olov





 Have tried it now... I tried the 5.0 snapshot from aug 17 with the improved
em
 driver. Also tested with more allocated cores and the SMP kernel.

 Result on 5.0 snapshot with improved em driver:

 - SMP
 worse. Really sucks! _Dramatically_ reduced throughput.

 Will be fine to see systat ; systat mbufs ; netstat -m ; vmstat -i and
 compare them with previous version. Including dmesg (if something
 changed in dmesg)


 - One processor core (as most of my tests have used)
 An improvement, but very little. Maybe 10% better

 As stated in some of links and posts sent to you - SMP doesn't offer
 better throughput/sped automatically. You need to test on i386
 non-SMP/SMP and amd64 non-SMP/SMP to see what's best.



 /Per-Olov





YES, YES and YES again !!!

I have done  a huge mistake during my tests. To much kernel copying... The
result was that the kernel with disabled mpbios was /bsd.old. Very
embarrassing.

I have now a throughput of no less than 560Mbit / s. And that is through the
VIRTUAL firewall with more than 50% IDLE CPU. Y e e e e e e s s ! How is
really possible. But it is...

### Summary: ###
- KVM virtualized STOCK OpenBSD 4.9 + Stable updates + sysctl.conf tuning +
disabled mpbios. running uniprocesor kernel
- 324 rows PF ruleset
- 2 Intel PRO/1000 MT (82574L) desktop NICs used through PCI passthrough
from the KVM virtualization host
- OpenBSD have got 512MB RAM, One CPU core from host (Xeon 5504 2.0Ghz)

Test:
An SCP with the crypto overhead (default crypto) you get from A 64 bit
SuseLinux through the firewall to  my Macbook pro (quadcore i7 2.2GHz 8GM RAM,
OCZ-Vertex 3 SSD disk). Several tests with DVD ISO files between 3-6 GB i
size. 540Mbit was the _lowest_ average speed in the test and 560 Mbit / s was
the highest
#


I am really satisfied with this. I was going to test FreeBSD beta 9 with its
PF 4.5 just for fun. But I will skip that when the results ended up this
good.


OpenBSD really indeed perform V E R Y well in this area.


Per-Olov



Inscripciones Congreso Nacional Internet Marketing

2011-08-24 Thread Lucero Gomez
186135

[IMAGE]

WSI, Pms de Mixico  Adsmedia presentan  Capacitacisn Efectiva de Mixico
presenta:

Congreso Nacional Internet Marketing Evolution

Presentando las tematicas y tendencias mas innovadoras que le permitan
desarrollar una estrategia de MKT Digital apropiada a su necesidad.

Presentacisn Exclusiva: 30 de Septiembre Ciudad de Mixico

Traemos los mejores eventos para usted, conozca los beneficios de
capacitarse con los mejores!

Empresa Registrada ante la STPS Reg. COLG640205CP30005

Smguenos en Twitter@pmscapacitacion o bien en Facebook PMS de Mixico

!Solicite Mayores Informes! Por favor responda este e-mail con los datos
siguientes.

Empresa:

Nombre:
Telifono:
Email:

Nzmero de Interesados:

En breve recibira la informacisn completa de este inigualable evento.

Comunmquese a los telifonos y con gusto uno de nuestros ejecutivos le
atendera.

Telifonos: (0133) 8851-2365, (0133) 8851-2741, (0133) 1568-4647.

Copyright (C) 2011, PMS Capacitacisn Efectiva de Mixico  S.C. Derechos
Reservados. PMS de Mixico, El logo de PMS de Mixico son marcas
registradas. ADVERTENCIA PMS de Mixico no cuenta con alianzas
estratigicas de ningzn tipo dentro de la Republica Mexicana. NO SE DEJE
ENGAQAR - DIGA NO A LA PIRATERIA. Todos los logotipos, marcas comerciales
e imagenes son propiedad de sus respectivas corporaciones y se utilizan
con fines informativos solamente.

Este Mensaje ha sido enviado a misc@openbsd.org como usuario de Pms de
Mixico o bien un usuario le refiris para recibir este boletmn.
Como usuario de Pms de Mixico, en este acto autoriza de manera expresa
que Pms de Mixico le puede contactar vma correo electrsnico u otros
medios.
Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, haga caso omiso de el y
reporte su cuenta respondiendo este correo con el subject BAJAMKT

Unsubscribe to this mailing list, reply a blank message with the subject
UNSUBSCRIBE BAJAMKT
Tenga en cuenta que la gestisn de nuestras bases de datos es de suma
importancia y no es intencisn de la empresa la inconformidad del
receptor.

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/jpeg which had a name of 
evolution2.jpg]



Re: Expected throughput in an OpenBSD virtual server

2011-08-24 Thread Ryan McBride
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 07:00:09PM +0200, Per-Olov SjC6holm wrote:
 - SMP
 worse. Really sucks! _Dramatically_ reduced throughput.

This is probably a result of you testing a virtualised guest rather than
real hardware.
 

 - One processor core (as most of my tests have used)
 An improvement, but very little. Maybe 10% better

10% is fantastic.  What were you expecting? 10x improvement from a
network driver change?  All the easy optimizations have already been
done.



Why am I not surprised?

2011-08-24 Thread Rod Whitworth
I recently saw the Full Disclosure mailing list discussion of the
Apache DoS vuln.
(http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2011/Aug/175)

So I did pkg_add p5-Parallel-ForkManager on a 4.9 release i386, and ran
the perl script from killapache_pl.bin (on the FD mail list). It had
absolutely no visible effect on our Apache 1.3 running on a 5.0
snapshot (Generic #16)

It didn't run out of memory, the server didn't crash and the CPU load
seen by systat was minimal (1%).

As the title says Why am I not surprised?

Thanks devs for fixing bugs before they have sec numbers, you've done
it again!

R/

*** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I am subscribed to the list.
Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is 
tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to 
reply off list. Thankyou.

Rod/
---
This life is not the real thing.
It is not even in Beta.
If it was, then OpenBSD would already have a man page for it.