Re: HASt and write amplification on the seconday

> Extents (2 meg blocks) are used for synchronization after the > secondary is reconnected. Normally (the secondary is connected) writes > to the primary and the secondary are the same. Ah, Ok, that was not clear to me from the documentation. That would also expain what I was seeing when I did a

Re: FreeBSD 11.0: Installation of icingaweb2

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 09:07:56AM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Lars Engels

Cannot build 11-STABLE GENERIC with WITHOUT_CDDL=true ?

awk -f /usr/src/sys/tools/makeobjops.awk /usr/src/sys/dev/hyperv/vmbus/vmbus_if.m -h cc -target x86_64-unknown-freebsd11.0 --sysroot=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp -B/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin -c -x assembler-with-cpp -DLOCORE -O2 -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -march=native -g -nostdinc -I. -I/usr/src/sys

Re: FreeBSD 11.0: Installation of icingaweb2

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Lars Engels >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 05:48:23PM +0100, Thorsten

Re: FBSD 10.3 + ZFS + Sun x4500 = utter lock up.

On 2/8/17 05:53 , Ronald Klop wrote: > ... > Any reason not to try 11? I don't know if it fixes anything, but it > would be a nice data point for comparison. I'll probably give that a try shortly but given the problem was seen in previous releases I'm not optimistic. I'm only in that location

Re: HASt and write amplification on the seconday

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 06:41:21PM +, Pete French wrote: > I have a pair of machines which I have been runnig HAST on > for a number of years. It works well, it does what Ineed it > to do, and I havent considered the details until recently. > > As I udnesratnd it though, the minimum size of

Re: FBSD 10.3 + ZFS + Sun x4500 = utter lock up.

At work we used to run such a machine with 9.1 and 10.2. My colleague tells me 10.3 gave errors, but he does not remember what. The machine is not in use anymore, because of other upgrades, so I can't verify for you. Any reason not to try 11? I don't know if it fixes anything, but it would

RE: Building i386 on i386

Turns out that I had DEBUG_FLAGS=-g in make.conf. When linking clang with -g the 2GByte limit of i386 is exceeded. Thanks, harti -Original Message- From: Dimitry Andric [mailto:d...@freebsd.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:56 PM To: Brandt, Hartmut Cc: sta...@freebsd.org