Re: ZFS on Root

2011-07-06 Thread Todor Dragnev

On 23.06.2011, at 16:08, Chris Brennan wrote:

 * Peter Toth free...@snap.net.nz [2011-06-23 22:54:59 +1200]:
 
 Did you set the mount point properly for your ZFS root? My previous post
 was intended as an example only, you need to tailor it to your setup.
 Also, you can use mfsbsd for installation very easy and straightforward
 http://mfsbsd.vx.sk/ . 
 
 This looks great, but my foggy brain isn't understanding how to use it? 
 Do I just burn the iso to media and boot it? Or is there some track that 
 involves a wand (sorry for my sarcasm lol)

Hi Chris

I just installed ZFS on ROOT on two 1TB SATA disks:

First you need to download freebsd 8.2 memstick release

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.2R/announce.html

After booting from memstick you must enter in Fixit shell

and then to follow step by step instructions from post in Dan's blog:

https://www.dan.me.uk/blog/2010/02/08/booting-from-zfs-raid0156-in-freebsd/

 
 
 -- 
 Chris Brennan
 -- 

___
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


Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread O. Hartmann
When performing an update on the ports tree via portsnap fetch update 
or when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying 
large data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical 
modelings) or when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE 
tend to freeze for several seconds or drop overall performance 
dramatically for seconds. On boxes with only console- or terminal access 
(no GUI) a running 'vi' gets stuck for seconds while one of the 
processes producing heavy I/O is running, or the output of a 'cat' of a 
large file stops for several seconds.


Using X11, this phenomenon gets even worse and the 'freezing' tends to 
persist sometimes for more than 10 or 15 seconds.


The boxes in question are all 64Bit, do have 2 to 8 CPUs/cores (no SMT) 
and not less than 8 GB of RAM (the 8 core box is a dual socket Dell 
server with two 4-core C2D-type XEON CPUs and 16 GB of RAM). All these 
boxes uses ZFS filesystems for data along with UFS2 for the OS.


On a notebook with a relative modern Core-5 dual core CPU and 4 GB RAM 
(running FreeBSD 9.0-CURRENT/amd64), not ZFS, all UFS, with a 500GB 
harddrive at 5400 upm (Dell Latitude E6510), this phenomenon is even 
worse. Heavy disk I/O blocks the GUI for nearly half a minute, even when 
no X11 is activated, the console gets stuck for a while. First I thought 
this could be a problem with the slow harddrive, but I tried also a 
Linux Ubuntu 11.04 on the box and forcing heavy I/O by copying the large 
files in question from one location on the disk to another is performed 
even faster and without any freezing of a console or GUI (used EXT4 
filesystem).
I'm curious about this behavior. I use FreeBSD as my favourite HPC 
platform as far as this is possible with FreeBSD, but I realized this 
bottleneck when it comes to heavy I/O and I'd like to know whether this 
is only a superficial phenomenon (like caused by the outdated X11 
version FreeBSD use or a low priorized tty handling, means only the 
observer realize a performance drop).
I've got not the time to investigate this deeper (I'd like to perform 
some benchmarks on the notebook if it is available again, but my 
knowledge on Linux/Ubuntu is very limited and the how-to setting up 
FreeBSD and Linux to match each other on the same hardware could be tricky).


My kernel setups on FreeBSD are mostly the GENERIC kernel with extracted 
drivers I do not use (like some USB devices, SAS/SCSI adaptors etc. we 
do not use, et cetera), nothing special. Either way I follow the tips 
presented in tuning(7) or not, the phenomenon is present.


Thanks,
Oliver
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Christer Solskogen
2011/7/6 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de:
having performance issues

Could you post /etc/sysctl.conf and /boot/loader.conf? Also, the
output of uname -a on all machines would be nice.
And since you don't use GENERIC, could you also tell us what
difference your setup is from a GENERIC kernel?

-- 
chs,
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread arrowdodger
2011/7/6 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de

 When performing an update on the ports tree via portsnap fetch update or
 when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large
 data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
 when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE tend to freeze for
 several seconds or drop overall performance dramatically for seconds. On
 boxes with only console- or terminal access (no GUI) a running 'vi' gets
 stuck for seconds while one of the processes producing heavy I/O is running,
 or the output of a 'cat' of a large file stops for several seconds.

 Using X11, this phenomenon gets even worse and the 'freezing' tends to
 persist sometimes for more than 10 or 15 seconds.


I've also had (and still having) this problem on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE and
8-STABLE with both UFS and ZFS. Though, i've been running FreeBSD not on
powerful servers, but on laptops (2-core CPU's, 2 GB of RAM). But still,
KDE4 on Linux performs much better during high disk IO.
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Alexander Best
On Wed Jul  6 11, arrowdodger wrote:
 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de
 
  When performing an update on the ports tree via portsnap fetch update or
  when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large
  data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
  when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE tend to freeze for
  several seconds or drop overall performance dramatically for seconds. On
  boxes with only console- or terminal access (no GUI) a running 'vi' gets
  stuck for seconds while one of the processes producing heavy I/O is running,
  or the output of a 'cat' of a large file stops for several seconds.

this might be a scheduling issue. iirc i/o intensive tasks have higher priority
than cpu intensive tasks, because they are expected to only issue a i/o request
and then free the processor, while cpu intensive tasks occupy the cpu a lot
longer. so maybe a process whith cyclic i/o requests blocks processes which
aren't doing i/o.

maybe playing with ULE's options can improve the situation. since you're
running GENERIC, preemption *should* be enabled. however you should double
check. i once tried running ULE without preemption and experienced exactly the
same situation you described in your mail. for ULE preemption is pretty much
mandatory. for the old 4bsd scheduler, running without preemtion doesn't really
make that much of a difference, compared to running with preemption.

you might also want to try enabling options IPI_PREEMPTION. no idea, if this
improves your situation, though.

cheers.
alex

 
  Using X11, this phenomenon gets even worse and the 'freezing' tends to
  persist sometimes for more than 10 or 15 seconds.
 
 
 I've also had (and still having) this problem on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE and
 8-STABLE with both UFS and ZFS. Though, i've been running FreeBSD not on
 powerful servers, but on laptops (2-core CPU's, 2 GB of RAM). But still,
 KDE4 on Linux performs much better during high disk IO.
___
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: Tool to show the recent disk space consumers?

2011-07-06 Thread Julian H. Stacey
Kurt Buff wrote:
 On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:37, Yuri y...@rawbw.com wrote:
  Hi,
 
  I hit this problem periodically when a lot of disk space is gone and it's
  hard to tell where did it go. Once it was thunderbird writing huge index
  file as a consequence of some bug, on another occasion it was the bug in KDE
  writing some huge index somewhere in ~/.kde4.
 
  Is there a tool slowly indexing the file system and showing where exactly
  did the sudden growth of consumed space occur?
 
  I know about du(1) but I am looking for some program that can detect the
  dynamics and pinpoint the offending files.
 
  Yuri
 
 kdirstat might prove useful, if it's run periodically.

/usr/ports/sysutils/kdirstat

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com
 Reply below, not above;  Indent with  ;  Cumulative like a play script.
 Format: Plain text. Not HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable.
___
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: ipfw: getsockopt(IP_FW_ADD): Invalid argument

2011-07-06 Thread Unga


--- On Tue, 7/5/11, Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au wrote:

   Does anybody successfully use the ipfw fwd? If so
 in which FreeBSD version?
 
 Not I, but many do.  On the face of it the rule looks
 correct.  Do you 
 have a TCP service running on localhost:1234 ?  Does
 wlan0 exist?  You 
 may do better posting to the freebsd-ipfw list, with more
 information.
 
 cheers, Ian

Hi Ian

I have added 'options IPFIREWALL' and rebuilt all, now 'ipfw fwd' works well.

So the 'options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD' alone is insufficient, the 'options 
IPFIREWALL' is also required.

Thank you and all others who helped me in this regard.

Cheers
Unga
___
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: ipfw: getsockopt(IP_FW_ADD): Invalid argument

2011-07-06 Thread Ian Smith
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011, Unga wrote:
  On Tue, 7/5/11, Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au wrote:
Does anybody successfully use the ipfw fwd? If so
in which FreeBSD version?
  
   Not I, but many do.  On the face of it the rule looks
   correct.  Do you 
   have a TCP service running on localhost:1234 ?  Does
   wlan0 exist?  You 
   may do better posting to the freebsd-ipfw list, with more
   information.
  
   cheers, Ian
 
  Hi Ian
 
  I have added 'options IPFIREWALL' and rebuilt all, now 'ipfw fwd' 
  works well.
 
  So the 'options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD' alone is insufficient, the
  'options IPFIREWALL' is also required.

Right; I guess if you're building it into kernel you have to configure 
all relevant options there too.  That could be more explicitly stated.

  Thank you and all others who helped me in this regard.

Glad it's working.  Another win for the collective wisdom ..

cheers, Ian___
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

Perl Problem After Upgrade to 5.12.4

2011-07-06 Thread Tim Daneliuk
Ideas anyone?

I am trying to rebuild SpamAssassin after a perl upgrade to 5.12.4 and
get this  (I DID run perl-after-upgrade prior to this):

===   p5-Encode-Detect-1.01 depends on file: 
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.12.4/Module/Build.pm - not found
===Verifying install for 
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.12.4/Module/Build.pm in 
/usr/ports/devel/p5-Module-Build
===  License check disabled, port has not defined LICENSE
===  Extracting for p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1
= SHA256 Checksum OK for Module-Build-0.3800.tar.gz.
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on file: /usr/local/bin/perl5.12.4 - 
found
===  Patching for p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on file: /usr/local/bin/perl5.12.4 - 
found
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on package: p5-CPAN-Meta=2.110420 - 
found
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on package: 
p5-Module-Metadata=1.02 - found
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on package: p5-Parse-CPAN-Meta=1.44.01 
- found
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on package: p5-Perl-OSType=1.000 - 
found
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on package: p5-version=0.87 - found
===   p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1 depends on file: /usr/local/bin/perl5.12.4 - 
found
===  Configuring for p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1
*** BOOTSTRAPPING Perl::OSType ***
*** BOOTSTRAPPING version ***
*** BOOTSTRAPPING Module::Metadata ***
Checking prerequisites...
  requires:
!  CPAN::Meta is not installed
  build_requires:
!  Parse::CPAN::Meta (1.40) is installed, but we need version = 1.4401

ERRORS/WARNINGS FOUND IN PREREQUISITES.  You may wish to install the versions
of the modules indicated above before proceeding with this installation

Could not create MYMETA files
Creating new 'Build' script for 'Module-Build' version '0.3800'
Copied META.yml to MYMETA.yml for bootstrapping

These additional prerequisites must be installed:
  requires:
! Perl::OSType (we need version 1.00)
! version (we need version 0.87)
! Module::Metadata (we need version 1.02)
===  Building for p5-Module-Build-0.3800_1
Can't locate Perl/OSType.pm in @INC (@INC contains: t/lib t/bundled lib 
/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.12.4/BSDPAN /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.12.4/mach 
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.12.4 /usr/local/lib/perl5/5.12.4/mach 
/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.12.4 .) at lib/Module/Build.pm line 13.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at lib/Module/Build.pm line 13.
Compilation failed in require at Build line 42.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at Build line 42.
*** Error code 2

Stop in /usr1/ports/devel/p5-Module-Build.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr1/ports/converters/p5-Encode-Detect.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr1/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr1/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassi
-- 

Tim Daneliuk
tun...@tundraware.com
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread O. Hartmann

On 07/06/11 12:37, arrowdodger wrote:

2011/7/6 O. Hartmannohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de


When performing an update on the ports tree via portsnap fetch update or
when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large
data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE tend to freeze for
several seconds or drop overall performance dramatically for seconds. On
boxes with only console- or terminal access (no GUI) a running 'vi' gets
stuck for seconds while one of the processes producing heavy I/O is running,
or the output of a 'cat' of a large file stops for several seconds.

Using X11, this phenomenon gets even worse and the 'freezing' tends to
persist sometimes for more than 10 or 15 seconds.



I've also had (and still having) this problem on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE and
8-STABLE with both UFS and ZFS. Though, i've been running FreeBSD not on
powerful servers, but on laptops (2-core CPU's, 2 GB of RAM). But still,
KDE4 on Linux performs much better during high disk IO.


I read about issues with the old codebase of X11 in FreeBSD's ports 
used, which could be the cause of some performance problems, but I 
wouldn't expect those I/O-triggered blockings on boxes without any GUI.


I saw Linux very often performing tremendously better when used as a 
workstation or desktop, but this is often gained on the costs of other 
subsystems. I followed a very hard-to-understand discussion about 
grouping threads related to ttys which seems to get higher priorized in 
Linux to make the GUI more fluent, but this is definitely on cost of 
other subsystems, which in consequence gets less priorized.
But even without GUI, Linux seems to perform I/O much better on 
multicore-/multiprocessor boxes than FreeBSD *.X and 9.X).


Today I looked at some benchmarks performed by 
Phoronix/openbenchmark.org 
(http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=freebsd8_ubuntu910num=9) 
and it seems that threaded I/O is an issue in FreeBSD (compared to 
Linux). I have no glue how to tune those bottlenecks away in FBSD.


I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing 
better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching 
back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.


Oliver

___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
 
 I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing 
 better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching 
 back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.
 

If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
to use SCHED_4BSD.  I've posted numerous times about ULE
and its very poor performance when using MPI.

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html

-- 
Steve
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Hartmann, O.

On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote:

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:

I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.


If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
to use SCHED_4BSD.  I've posted numerous times about ULE
and its very poor performance when using MPI.

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html



Worth a try,
but most of my code I use is OpenMP, not MPI.

The post is of 2008, that's three years ago and 9.0 is on the brink to 
become released ...

___
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


p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.56_1 and p5-ExtUtils-Install-1.54_1 conflict

2011-07-06 Thread n dhert
Hi,
p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.56_1 and p5-ExtUtils-Install-1.54_1 conflict
both telling that the other one should be deleted.
So which one of the two to keep
so far, I opted for keeping p5-ExtUtils-Install-1.54_1, deleting
p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.56_1, is this wise or should it be the other
way round?
or what?

There's nothing in /usr/ports/UPDATING about that..
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Adrian Chadd
Has anyone re-run those IO benchmarks?

Something smells fishy there.. (with the benchmarking.)


adrian

2011/7/6 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de:
 On 07/06/11 12:37, arrowdodger wrote:

 2011/7/6 O. Hartmannohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de

 When performing an update on the ports tree via portsnap fetch update
 or
 when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying
 large
 data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
 when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE tend to freeze
 for
 several seconds or drop overall performance dramatically for seconds. On
 boxes with only console- or terminal access (no GUI) a running 'vi' gets
 stuck for seconds while one of the processes producing heavy I/O is
 running,
 or the output of a 'cat' of a large file stops for several seconds.

 Using X11, this phenomenon gets even worse and the 'freezing' tends to
 persist sometimes for more than 10 or 15 seconds.


 I've also had (and still having) this problem on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE and
 8-STABLE with both UFS and ZFS. Though, i've been running FreeBSD not on
 powerful servers, but on laptops (2-core CPU's, 2 GB of RAM). But still,
 KDE4 on Linux performs much better during high disk IO.

 I read about issues with the old codebase of X11 in FreeBSD's ports used,
 which could be the cause of some performance problems, but I wouldn't expect
 those I/O-triggered blockings on boxes without any GUI.

 I saw Linux very often performing tremendously better when used as a
 workstation or desktop, but this is often gained on the costs of other
 subsystems. I followed a very hard-to-understand discussion about grouping
 threads related to ttys which seems to get higher priorized in Linux to make
 the GUI more fluent, but this is definitely on cost of other subsystems,
 which in consequence gets less priorized.
 But even without GUI, Linux seems to perform I/O much better on
 multicore-/multiprocessor boxes than FreeBSD *.X and 9.X).

 Today I looked at some benchmarks performed by Phoronix/openbenchmark.org
 (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=freebsd8_ubuntu910num=9)
 and it seems that threaded I/O is an issue in FreeBSD (compared to Linux). I
 have no glue how to tune those bottlenecks away in FBSD.

 I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
 better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching back
 to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.

 Oliver

 ___
 freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 06:38:23PM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote:
 On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
 I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
 better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
 back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.
 
 If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
 to use SCHED_4BSD.  I've posted numerous times about ULE
 and its very poor performance when using MPI.
 
 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html
 
 
 Worth a try,
 but most of my code I use is OpenMP, not MPI.

It may impact OpenMP.  I don't have any OpenMP to test.  But,
if OpenMP is spawning as many or more threads than the number
of available processors/cores, then I think you will have 
problems.

 The post is of 2008, that's three years ago and 9.0 is on the brink to 
 become released ...

I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
last three years.  Nothing has changed.  I even set up an account
on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use.  He was too busy to
investigate at that time.

-- 
Steve
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message 20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl w
rites:

I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
last three years.  Nothing has changed.  I even set up an account
on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use.  He was too busy to
investigate at that time.

Isn't this just the lemming-syncer hurling every dirty block over
the cliff at the same time ?

To find out:  Run gstat and keep and eye on the leftmost column

The road map for fixing that has been known for years...

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 In message 20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl 
 w
 rites:
 
 I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
 last three years.  Nothing has changed.  I even set up an account
 on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use.  He was too busy to
 investigate at that time.
 
 Isn't this just the lemming-syncer hurling every dirty block over
 the cliff at the same time ?

I don't know the answer.  Of course, having no experience in
processing scheduling, I don't understand the question either ;-)

AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue.  If I launch n+1 MPI images
on a system with n cpus/cores, then 2 (and sometimes 3) images
are stuck on a cpu and those 2 (or 3) images ping-pong on that
cpu.  I recall trying to use renice(8) to force some load 
balancing, but vaguely remember that it did not help.

 To find out:  Run gstat and keep and eye on the leftmost column
 
 The road map for fixing that has been known for years...

I'll keep this in mind, the next time I upgrade the cluster.
It's currently running a Feb 10th vintage kernel, and is
under fairly heavy use at the moment.

-- 
Steve
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
 Hi,
 
 On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
 s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
  On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
 
  I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
  better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
  back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.
 
 
  If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
  to use SCHED_4BSD. ?I've posted numerous times about ULE
  and its very poor performance when using MPI.
 
  http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html
 
 [sarcasm]
 It is rather funny to see that the post you point out has generated
 exactly 0 meaningful follow-up then and as you mention later in this
 thread, the issue still remains today :-)
 [/sarcasm]
 

Apparently, you are privy to my private email exchanges
with jeffr.

I'm also not sure why you're being sarcastic here.  The
issue was and AFAIK still is a problem for anyone using
FreeBSD in a HPC cluster.  ULE simply performs worse than
4BSD.

-- 
Steve
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi,

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:

 I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
 better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
 back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.


 If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
 to use SCHED_4BSD.  I've posted numerous times about ULE
 and its very poor performance when using MPI.

 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html

[sarcasm]
It is rather funny to see that the post you point out has generated
exactly 0 meaningful follow-up then and as you mention later in this
thread, the issue still remains today :-)
[/sarcasm]

 - Arnaud
___
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: p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.56_1 and p5-ExtUtils-Install-1.54_1 conflict

2011-07-06 Thread Matthew Seaman
On 06/07/2011 17:40, n dhert wrote:
 p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.56_1 and p5-ExtUtils-Install-1.54_1 conflict
 both telling that the other one should be deleted.
 So which one of the two to keep
 so far, I opted for keeping p5-ExtUtils-Install-1.54_1, deleting
 p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.56_1, is this wise or should it be the other
 way round?
 or what?

These modules by their nature tend to be required just for building
other ports.  Therefore, keep whichever one is required for the port
you're installing at the moment, and delete the other one.

To save work, consider creating packages of both ports, so that you can
just pkg_add whichever one you need.

It might get tricky if you're installing a big complicated port with
loads of perl module dependencies, where some of the dependencies want
one, and some want the other.  It's possible that having
ExtUtils::MakeMaker will actually satisfy the BUILD_DEPENDS for most
ports -- it's older and fairly unix-specific, whereas ExtUtils::Install
does the same sort of thing for a wider range of OSes.  But FreeBSD is
unix, so we don't actually need the extra fiddly bits from
ExtUtils::Install.  However, I only intuit this from reading the docco.
 I haven't tested it, so it may be a load of old baloney...

Cheers,

Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.   7 Priory Courtyard
  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk   Kent, CT11 9PW



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Hartmann, O.

On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu  wrote:

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:

I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.


If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
to use SCHED_4BSD. ?I've posted numerous times about ULE
and its very poor performance when using MPI.

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html


[sarcasm]
It is rather funny to see that the post you point out has generated
exactly 0 meaningful follow-up then and as you mention later in this
thread, the issue still remains today :-)
[/sarcasm]


Apparently, you are privy to my private email exchanges
with jeffr.

I'm also not sure why you're being sarcastic here.  The
issue was and AFAIK still is a problem for anyone using
FreeBSD in a HPC cluster.  ULE simply performs worse than
4BSD.

Well, I know only very little people using FreeBSD within a HPC cluster 
or even for scientific purposes, except myself and some people around here.

___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Nathan Whitehorn

On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote:

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl w
rites:


I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
last three years.  Nothing has changed.  I even set up an account
on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use.  He was too busy to
investigate at that time.


Isn't this just the lemming-syncer hurling every dirty block over
the cliff at the same time ?


I don't know the answer.  Of course, having no experience in
processing scheduling, I don't understand the question either ;-)

AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue.  If I launch n+1 MPI images
on a system with n cpus/cores, then 2 (and sometimes 3) images
are stuck on a cpu and those 2 (or 3) images ping-pong on that
cpu.  I recall trying to use renice(8) to force some load
balancing, but vaguely remember that it did not help.


I've seen exactly this problem with multi-threaded math libraries, as 
well. Using parallel GotoBLAS on FreeBSD gives terrible performance 
because the threads keep migrating between CPUs, causing frequent cache 
misses.

-Nathan
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Oliver Pinter
On 7/6/11, Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote:
 On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
 Hi,

 On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
 s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu  wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
 I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
 better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
 back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.

 If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
 to use SCHED_4BSD. ?I've posted numerous times about ULE
 and its very poor performance when using MPI.

 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html

 [sarcasm]
 It is rather funny to see that the post you point out has generated
 exactly 0 meaningful follow-up then and as you mention later in this
 thread, the issue still remains today :-)
 [/sarcasm]

 Apparently, you are privy to my private email exchanges
 with jeffr.

 I'm also not sure why you're being sarcastic here.  The
 issue was and AFAIK still is a problem for anyone using
 FreeBSD in a HPC cluster.  ULE simply performs worse than
 4BSD.

 Well, I know only very little people using FreeBSD within a HPC cluster
 or even for scientific purposes, except myself and some people around here.
 ___
 freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org



http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2010-September/thread.html#58537
___
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: ZFS on Root

2011-07-06 Thread Chris Brennan
* Todor Dragnev todor.drag...@gmail.com [2011-07-06 10:43:17 +0300]:

Inline reply:

 
 Hi Chris
 
 I just installed ZFS on ROOT on two 1TB SATA disks:
 
 First you need to download freebsd 8.2 memstick release
 
 http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.2R/announce.html

I did this via VirtualBox first, so the livefs iso or the DVD was more 
approprite here, I choose the dvd so I had quick install times.

 After booting from memstick you must enter in Fixit shell and then to 
 follow step by step instructions from post in Dan's blog:
 
 https://www.dan.me.uk/blog/2010/02/08/booting-from-zfs-raid0156-in-freebsd/
 
A most excellent guide to follow, I made some slight adjustments for my 
environment and desire, even scripted the process a little bit (with my 
tastes of course) and it went without error. The problem came when I 
went to reboot. The system just hangs, I'm going on 7min now with it 
just sitting at what I would presume should be the loader prompt. No 
import moves things along. The last post on the link you provided pretty 
much sums up my issue currently.

If you or anyone else has some advise on this, I would be greatly 
appreciated.

-- 
 Chris Brennan
 -- 
 A: Yes.
 Q: Are you sure?
 A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
 http://xkcd.com/84/ | http://xkcd.com/149/ | http://xkcd.com/549/
 GPG: D5B20C0C (6741 8EE4 6C7D 11FB 8DA8  9E4A EECD 9A84 D5B2 0C0C)

___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Adrian Chadd
Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?

thanks,



Adrian

On 7 July 2011 05:00, Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote:
 On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:

 On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:

 Hi,

 On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
 s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu  wrote:

 On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:

 I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
 better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
 back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.

 If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want
 to use SCHED_4BSD. ?I've posted numerous times about ULE
 and its very poor performance when using MPI.


 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html

 [sarcasm]
 It is rather funny to see that the post you point out has generated
 exactly 0 meaningful follow-up then and as you mention later in this
 thread, the issue still remains today :-)
 [/sarcasm]

 Apparently, you are privy to my private email exchanges
 with jeffr.

 I'm also not sure why you're being sarcastic here.  The
 issue was and AFAIK still is a problem for anyone using
 FreeBSD in a HPC cluster.  ULE simply performs worse than
 4BSD.

 Well, I know only very little people using FreeBSD within a HPC cluster or
 even for scientific purposes, except myself and some people around here.
 ___
 freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
 Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
 

steve == ENOMONEY  jeffr == ENOTIME

And, 4BSD works.

-- 
Steve
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
 On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
 Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?


 steve == ENOMONEY  jeffr == ENOTIME

 And, 4BSD works.

I meant it as a more general observation.

If something doesn't work as needed, consider either diving in to fix
it, or offering a bounty to someone to do so.

It sounds like these scheduler issues (IO and threads) are well-known
and reasonably well-understood.
All that's lacking is the last bit of the puzzle - the actual
developer to develop it. :)


Adrian
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:39:00AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
 On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
  On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
  Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
 
 
  steve == ENOMONEY  jeffr == ENOTIME
 
  And, 4BSD works.
 
 I meant it as a more general observation.
 
 If something doesn't work as needed, consider either diving in to fix
 it, or offering a bounty to someone to do so.
 

Or take the path of least resistance, use 4BSD, and get my actual work.

I diagnosed the problem.

I gave a fairly easy method for reproducing the problem
(including providing a statically linked MPI program, and
a script and data files to launch it). 

I offered access to one of the nodes in my cluster (including
root access to install new kernels and to reboot the node).

Unfortunately, I have neither the brain capacity and time nor
the money to fix the issue.  To solve OP's problem in the 
short, the simplest solution may be to switch to 4BSD.  Let's
face, ULE is not a silver bullet.

-- 
Steve
___
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: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011-07-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi,

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
 On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
 On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
 Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?


 steve == ENOMONEY  jeffr == ENOTIME

 And, 4BSD works.

 I meant it as a more general observation.

 If something doesn't work as needed, consider either diving in to fix
 it, or offering a bounty to someone to do so.

What would be the point to even start looking at an issue? You guys
(by you, I mean official committers on public list) don't care
about people providing patches, might it be for trivial, obvious,
fixes. I'm not even talking about complex patches ... When you
eventually ends up providing a patch, you ends up being slammed a door
at by maintainers asserting their code is perfect, until logic and
user complaints prove them wrong.

That said, this comment is off-topic, but I will certainly re-state
this next month when I'll be ping'ing trivial patches.

 - Arnaud

 It sounds like these scheduler issues (IO and threads) are well-known
 and reasonably well-understood.
 All that's lacking is the last bit of the puzzle - the actual
 developer to develop it. :)


 Adrian

___
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