Hi All,
I posted this a coupla days ago and just thought I would ask again in the
hope that someone had encounted something since then.
Has anyone here tried setting net.inet.ip.fastforwarding on in a high
traffic enviroment?
This setting DRASTICALLY speeds up transfers between boxes talking
Hi All,
I posted this a coupla days ago and just thought I would ask again in the
hope that someone had encounted something since then.
Has anyone here tried setting net.inet.ip.fastforwarding on in a high
traffic enviroment?
This setting DRASTICALLY speeds up transfers between boxes
Another coupla hundred kilobytes per second?
Andrew
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Hi All,
I posted this a coupla days ago and just thought I would ask again in the
hope that someone had encounted something since then.
Has anyone here tried setting
Another coupla hundred kilobytes per second?
from what to what ? sounds like a 5% improvement or even less...
cheers
luigi
Andrew
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Hi All,
I posted this a coupla days ago and just thought I would ask again in the
hope
Another couple of 100k/sec per connection.
When I was running as follows:
10mbit network - pix - freebsd gateway - internal network (100mbit)
with 100mbit ethernet on the fbsd gateway, 10mbit up to the gateway (there
are routers inbetween the pix and the gateway), and 100mbit on the
internal
Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Another coupla hundred kilobytes per second?
from what to what ? sounds like a 5% improvement or even less...
This setting DRASTICALLY speeds up transfers
between boxes talking through
a freebsd gateway when you are using 2 100mbit
interfaces, but it
I will take a look and see if I can get a panic message later on,
unfortunatly the one box that I have running forwarding is a highly
important system that I cant afford downtime on, and most of the time when
it panics Im working on it remotely, but it definatly panics and the box
reboots.
I
Has anyone here tried setting net.inet.ip.fastforwarding on in a high
traffic enviroment?
This setting DRASTICALLY speeds up transfers between boxes talking through
a freebsd gateway when you are using 2 100mbit interfaces, but it seems to
kernel panic the system after a few
The question is not "how fast is fast forwarding?", but
"why is it crashing?" I can imagine small timing changes
speeding up a session between other boxes.
yes, the original poster was concerned about crashes,
i was mainly concerned on the gains in fastforwarding
(as fastforwarding does not
It seems Mike Smith wrote:
It seems Mike Smith wrote:
Does anyone KNOW of these working under the
new drivers? What about setup?
I've seen plenty about people failing (in 98-99)
to get tehm going but the archives are silent on the topic
after that period. The hardware
"Matthew" == Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matthew :Believe me, I look at these things. Yes there is a lot
Matthew going on and a :lot using memory. I normally have about
Matthew 20% to 25% of my Gig of swap :used... meaning that I have
Matthew allocated roughly
Thanks for your reply. My problem, however, is that the NFS servers I'm
dealing with run a plethora of OSs. Believe you me, I'd love to run FreeBSD
on all of 'em, but that is simply out of my control. The '-h' option for
nfsd that was introduced v4.0 would be a great fix for this. What I
It kinda sounds to me like the improved speed you are getting is
from reduced latency rather then from higher available bandwidth.
right, i got the same feeling. only 550KB on a 10MBit ethernet is
kind of slow anyways.
cheers
luigi
You may be able to get the same
May I commit this? I'm going to need getfp to be non-static for
some stuff I have in the queue, I figured sendfile might as well
use it.
Fine by me.
-DG
David Greenman
Co-founder, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org
Manufacturer of high-performance Internet servers -
Not to mention "how much memory do you really gain by unloading modules"?
Considering the price of RAM these days (although not as low as
it was, but I won't be spending $650 US for 16M any time soon
again), the few K that unloading a bunch of modules saves won't
EVER
In the last episode (Jun 12), Jordan K. Hubbard said:
I'm sitting here in Seoul, Korea (which is very nice, by the way) and
I've just managed to delete all 82 images of Kyoto off the FAT-12 format
Smartcard they were on. Wh!
$ simx "undelete|unerase"
Primary Mirror Directory
:
:Thanks for your reply. My problem, however, is that the NFS servers I'm
:dealing with run a plethora of OSs. Believe you me, I'd love to run FreeBSD
:on all of 'em, but that is simply out of my control. The '-h' option for
:nfsd that was introduced v4.0 would be a great fix for this. What
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
I'm sitting here in Seoul, Korea (which is very nice, by the way) and
I've just managed to delete all 82 images of Kyoto off the FAT-12 format
Smartcard they were on. Wh!
Way back in the Dark Ages I used to hack on FAT-12 code...
Going *way* back in the
David Gilbert wrote:
I'm positive that its not a case of the working set being larger than
physical memory; it's one of choice of page to swap.
You are positively wrong, then. :-) Active pages are _always_ last
resort with the algorithm FreeBSD uses.
You mention Netscape is the only active
On Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:40:48AM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
David Gilbert wrote:
I'm positive that its not a case of the working set being larger than
physical memory; it's one of choice of page to swap.
You are positively wrong, then. :-) Active pages are _always_ last
resort
I notice that the FreeBSD bootloader (boot0) explicitly prohibits
booting from Extended DOS partitions (type 5). As far as I can
see, an Extended DOS partition looks like a virtual disk - sector
0 contains a partition table explaining how that partition is broken
up into secondary partitions.
:David Gilbert wrote:
:
: I'm positive that its not a case of the working set being larger than
: physical memory; it's one of choice of page to swap.
:
:You are positively wrong, then. :-) Active pages are _always_ last
:resort with the algorithm FreeBSD uses.
:
:You mention Netscape is the
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Steve Hocking wrote:
I've just moved from the one street in the Perth, Australia metropolitan area
that didn't have cable access to Houston, where I have a plethora of choices.
The apartment I'm planning to move into has Roadrunner access. Does anyone
have any
Ah, I should also have noted that undelete.exe (which I also fetched
from simtel) doesn't seem to work for me since it won't operate from
a DOS box and if I shut down to DOS, the pccard services go away and
I'm no longer able to mount the smartcard which I'd like to undelete
files on. Catch-22.
I have many of them up and running under 4.0, but they will only function
as normal IDE controllers, not "RAID".
As to teh BIOS issue, make a stripe, then make your partition that you're
using not stomp on the end of the drive, and it won't overwrite that gook
that the promise sticks out there.
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
Ah, I should also have noted that undelete.exe (which I also fetched
from simtel) doesn't seem to work for me since it won't operate from
a DOS box and if I shut down to DOS, the pccard services go away and
I'm no longer able to mount the smartcard which I'd like
26 matches
Mail list logo
