Re: kern/124904: [fxp] EEPROM corruption with Compaq NC3163 NIC

2008-06-24 Thread linimon
Old Synopsis: EEPROM corruption with Compaq NC3163 NIC New Synopsis: [fxp] EEPROM corruption with Compaq NC3163 NIC Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs-freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: linimon Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Jun 24 08:14:04 UTC 2008 Responsible-Changed-Why: Reclassify.

jboss4 on freebsd

2008-06-24 Thread Stefan Lambrev
Greetings, I'm experimenting with jboss4 cluster under freebsd 7 (amd64). In my configuration I have 2 jboss instances which are in cluster and they communicate via separate network (used only for shared data) When I create some load on the application sometimes I see this error: 2008-06-24

Re: jboss4 on freebsd

2008-06-24 Thread Stefan Lambrev
Paul wrote: kern.ipc.nmbclusters=128000 changed - no effect Check output from netstat -m, this shows network buffers. 770/8200/8970 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) 768/5426/6194/128000 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) 768/5248 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in

Re: jboss4 on freebsd

2008-06-24 Thread Dmitriy
-Original Message- From: Stefan Lambrev [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:58:30 +0300 Subject: jboss4 on freebsd Greetings, I'm experimenting with jboss4 cluster under freebsd 7 (amd64). In my configuration I have 2 jboss instances which are

Re: Route messages

2008-06-24 Thread Paul
2574 output packets discarded due to no route 2904 output datagrams fragmented 5808 fragments created not incrementing.. route monitor: got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008 RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno 0,

Re: jboss4 on freebsd

2008-06-24 Thread Julian Elischer
Stefan Lambrev wrote: Paul wrote: kern.ipc.nmbclusters=128000 changed - no effect if this is udp or some datagram traffic then it is telling you that the interface queue has filled up.. Check output from netstat -m, this shows network buffers. 770/8200/8970 mbufs in use

Why isn't ALTQ in GENERIC?

2008-06-24 Thread Erik Osterholm
Hi all, Can anyone tell me if there are good reasons for explicitly leaving ALTQ out of the kernel? More specific to my circumstances, if I'm building kernels to be installed on every machine we deploy, is it worth building a separate kernel for ALTQ for those few boxes which will require it?