On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:39:08PM -0700, Joe Peterson wrote:
Gavin Atkinson wrote:
Are the datestamps (Thu Jan 24 23:20:58 2008) found within the corrupt
block before or after the datestamp of the file it was found within?
i.e. was the corrupt block on the disk before or after the mp3 was
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 01:58:21PM +0200, Arnaud Houdelette wrote:
Pawel Jakub Dawidek a écrit :
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 03:00:41PM +0200, Arnaud Houdelette wrote:
3. I'd like to keep the storage pool (zraid1) separated from the system
pool (just one disk). The wiki states that we may
As has been pointed out on wikis, mailing lists, and even on IRC, ZFS
requires a bit of tuning -- specifically in regards to vm.kmem_size and
vm.kmem_size_max. The opinion is: ZFS is memory-hungry.
On my home RELENG_7 amd64 box (2GB RAM), I could panic the system with
heavy I/O due to kmem_size
On 2008-May-29 18:11:56 -0400, Robert Blayzor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
working. Only way to correct it seems to reboot the server... even under
RELENG_7_0 so the upgrade from 4_11 did not fix the problem.
Unfortunately, your issue is a bug in the client: The server is trying
to send data
On Fri, 30 May 2008, Peter Jeremy wrote:
As a work-around, you could write a cronjob that scans netstat and
temporarily creates an ipfw 'reset' rule that matches each FIN_WAIT_1
socket
In the past, I've used something like this:
netstat -an | grep FIN_WAIT_1 |
perl -pe
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Robert Blayzor wrote:
On May 29, 2008, at 8:55 PM, Matthew Dillon wrote:
It's got to a be a bug on the client(s) in question. I can't think
of anything else. You may have to resort to injecting a TCP RST
packet (e.g. via a TUN device) to clear the
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 06:11:43PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
A real solution would require more thought. I suspect you need a
mechanism similar to the keepalive timer that starts when there is
data queued and is reset when (some) data is sent - this would catch
your situation but I'm not
On 2008-05-30 07:03, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
Since you're running this patch would you post dmesg output related
with re(4)? Also please post the output of devinfo -rv | grep
oui.
dmesg
--
Copyright (c) 1992-2008 The FreeBSD
On May 29, 2008, at 11:07 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
Hrrm, are you running ipfw ON the web server box? If so, I'd be
curious as to why, and whether or not the problem goes away if you
take IPFW out of the equation. If IPFW is running on another
machine, never mind.
Yes, IPFW is running on
On May 30, 2008, at 4:41 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
Without debating your stateful alternative - either should work fine
for
TCP applications - this allowed inbound icmp packets for types
0,3,8,11
but no outbound icmp at all (assuming your firewall defaults to deny).
I didn't post all the
On May 30, 2008, at 4:47 AM, David Malone wrote:
There has been some talk about this sort of problem on the IETF TCP
Maintainers list. I don't think any good conclusion was reached -
whatever the solution was certainly needs to be tunable per-socket
because this behaviour is perfectly valid in
hi,
I try to run java to call external program heavily on very recent
STABLE. Somtimes java hang on calling external program. ps show some
defunct process name.
11599 p9 RL+ 0:02.77 /usr/local/jdk1.5.0/bin/java -classpath .
cn/org/gddsn/test/TestShell
12431 p9 R+ 0:00.00
On May 30, 2008, at 4:18 AM, Tod McQuillin wrote:
This relies on tcpdrop, included as /usr/sbin/tcpdrop on FreeBSD
6.x; you may need to install it from a port on FreeBSD 4.x.
Thanks, that seems like a reasonable band aid for now. Worked
perfectly.
--
Robert Blayzor, BOFH
INOC, LLC
On May 30, 2008, at 4:41 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
Without debating your stateful alternative - either should work fine
for
TCP applications - this allowed inbound icmp packets for types
0,3,8,11
but no outbound icmp at all (assuming your firewall defaults to deny).
Switching the ipfw rules
On 2008-May-30 05:35:56 -0400, Robert Blayzor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A timeout value would be fine.
The problem is selecting a sensible timeout - 30-60s might be reasonable
for a webserver that serves static content but is a bit short for a shell
session...
On a side note, I could easily fix
Since getting my cable upgraded to 24Mbit down and 10Mbit up and
getting excited with torrents, I've started experiencing weird errors
with my 3Com NIC whenever it's being used at high speeds. It'll
basically work fine for a while until it suddenly stops sending any
packets and the connection to
Gerrit Kühn wrote:
As Oliver already suggested, I will take out the controller and see what
happens then.
Talking about this controller: This is also the only board I am using with
PCI cards (and thus with a PCI riser) at all. I remember vaguely that I
had a few problems getting the
Quoting Oliver Fromme, who wrote on Fri, May 30, 2008 at 01:44:43PM +0200 ..
Gerrit Kühn wrote:
As Oliver already suggested, I will take out the controller and see what
happens then.
Talking about this controller: This is also the only board I am using with
PCI cards (and thus
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
[...]
vm.kmem_size=3584M
vm.kmem_size_max=3584M
Upon reboot, the kernel immediately panic'd with the following message:
kmem_suballoc(): bad status return of 3.
I then chose smaller values (going with 2048M); same panic.
I remember someone on the -fs
On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:44:43 +0200 (CEST) Oliver Fromme
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about Re: broken re(4):
OF Talking about this controller: This is also the only board I am
OF using with PCI cards (and thus with a PCI riser) at all. I remember
OF vaguely that I had a few problems getting the
On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:49:24 +0200 Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote about Re: broken re(4):
WB Typing pci riser card jumper in Google will give you
WB many more pages with interesting (or frightening) stuff
WB to read.
WB Well, if you know how the PCI bus electrically works this kind of
WB
On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:44:43 +0200 (CEST) Oliver Fromme
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about Re: broken re(4):
OF That rings a bell ...
OF I remember reports of riser cards that apparently changed
OF the timing on the PCI bus so they were only marginally
OF compliant with the spec, or maybe not even
On Fri, 30 May 2008 14:03:08 +0900 Pyun YongHyeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
about Re: broken re(4):
PY Since you're running this patch would you post dmesg output related
PY with re(4)? Also please post the output of devinfo -rv | grep
PY oui.
Here is my output with the latest (28th May) patch:
Quoting Gerrit Khn, who wrote on Fri, May 30, 2008 at 02:47:59PM +0200 ..
On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:49:24 +0200 Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote about Re: broken re(4):
WB Typing pci riser card jumper in Google will give you
WB many more pages with interesting (or frightening) stuff
WB
On Friday 30 May 2008 11:35:56 Robert Blayzor wrote:
On May 30, 2008, at 4:47 AM, David Malone wrote:
There has been some talk about this sort of problem on the IETF TCP
Maintainers list. I don't think any good conclusion was reached -
whatever the solution was certainly needs to be tunable
:Yes, IPFW is running on the box. Why not?
:
:--
:Robert Blayzor, BOFH
:INOC, LLC
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:http://www.inoc.net/~rblayzor/
There's nothing wrong with running IPFW on the same box :-)
But, I think that rule change is masking the problem rather then solving
it. The
On May 30, 2008, at 12:43 PM, Matthew Dillon wrote:
I would be very careful with any type of ruleset (IPFW or PF) which
relies on keep-state. You can wind up causing legitimate
connections
to drop if it isn't carefully tuned.
Thanks again Matt...
I do agree on the firewall and
Robert Blayzor wrote:
On May 29, 2008, at 11:07 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
Hrrm, are you running ipfw ON the web server box? If so, I'd be
curious as to why, and whether or not the problem goes away if you
take IPFW out of the equation. If IPFW is running on another machine,
never mind.
Yes,
On May 30, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
I'm not sure why, but I sense hostility on your part. I'm not sure
why, since that is an odd reaction to someone who is trying to help
you. If I'm wrong about that, never mind.
I'm not being hostile, geez. ;) I simply asked why not? Plenty
29 matches
Mail list logo
