On 3/6/2012 2:12 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> You haven't been bitten by the storage layer or filesystem hackery
> bits which has caused filesystem corruption. :)
Ummm, I have, actually. I was one of the early adopters of SU+J and
complained loudly when it ate my /var/ for lunch. I also use a lot of
You haven't been bitten by the storage layer or filesystem hackery
bits which has caused filesystem corruption. :)
That said, FFS+SUJ has made recover-from-kernel-panic so much less
painful. Thankyou Jeffr and others!
What I tend to do is either run current on a VM or organise some
dedicated -cur
On 3/4/2012 2:04 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> 2012/3/3 Doug Barton :
>> On 03/02/2012 16:05, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>> Try breaking that cycle.
>>
>> ... one of the things I've been asking for years. :)
>>
>> Julian's right though, I think PC-BSD will help, but I still think that
>> committers should ru
2012/3/3 Doug Barton :
> On 03/02/2012 16:05, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Try breaking that cycle.
>
> ... one of the things I've been asking for years. :)
>
> Julian's right though, I think PC-BSD will help, but I still think that
> committers should run -current. I've asked privately for our committer
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 03/03/2012 13:03, K. Macy wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote:
a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for
the state of FreeBSD. Simply disab
On 03/03/2012 13:03, K. Macy wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote:
>>> a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for
>>> the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing
>>> functionality that doesn't wo
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote:
>> a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for
>> the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing
>> functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or
>> f
On 03/02/2012 16:05, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Try breaking that cycle.
... one of the things I've been asking for years. :)
Julian's right though, I think PC-BSD will help, but I still think that
committers should run -current. I've asked privately for our committers
to go back to -current and then
On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote:
> a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for
> the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing
> functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or
> filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond
I'm re-sending this portion of another mail as it will inevitably not
be read by most readers by virtue of having been part of a long and
digressive thread.
subject line: "flowtable usable or not"
It is possible to re-structure the routing code to have a smaller
cache footprint /
o way with Doug Barton or ports per se, but
with his response as a representative instance of a behaviour which
bothers me, and, taken over time, is detrimental to the whole.
Back to the initial subject line: "flowtable usable or not"
It is possible to re-structure the routing code to have a
2012/3/2 Julian Elischer :
> On 3/2/12 10:21 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>
>> On 03/02/2012 03:44, K. Macy wrote:
>
> not sure who wrote:
>>>
>>> Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some
>>> degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a
>>> single prob
on 03/03/2012 13:44 O. Hartmann said the following:
> Back to the topic of the initial posting:
>
> Where can I find documentation for the "idiot" about flowtable? I can
> switch this to "ON" in the kernel config on FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE as well as
> in FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT. But I can not find any
On 03/03/12 07:44, H wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> [...] Sure,
>> our strength is servers, and that is not going to change.
I agree and disagree. Based upon the struggle with desktop usage and
focus on development, FreeBSD is de facto more server oriented. But in
comparison to several other non-
On 3/2/12 10:21 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 03/02/2012 03:44, K. Macy wrote:
not sure who wrote:
Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some
degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a
single problem keeping my package system up date, in stark c
I've had the same problem with wireless.
For some users, wireless works flawlessly.
For other users, it's completely unusable.
Trying to get any kind of useful feedback from people has been
impossible at best. I've even had FreeBSD developers, sitting in the
developers IRC channel, say wifi is s
on 03/03/2012 00:24 Doug Barton said the following:
> On 3/2/2012 1:27 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 02/03/2012 20:21 Doug Barton said the following:
>>> ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our
>>> developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation.
>>
>> Do you car
On 3/2/2012 1:27 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 02/03/2012 20:21 Doug Barton said the following:
>> ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our
>> developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation.
>
> Do you care to back this up with facts?
You mean other than the ver
on 02/03/2012 20:21 Doug Barton said the following:
> ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our
> developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation.
Do you care to back this up with facts?
Or are you going beyond constructive in your [self-]criticism of FreeBSD [OS,
Doug Barton wrote:
> ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our
> developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has
> increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall
> by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. Tha
> No, I already pointed out the distinction between "new, experimental
> features;" and "essential components of the FreeBSD operating system."
> It's Ok for you to disagree with that distinction, or with its
> importance. But what you're suggesting is that if users don't help
> developers debug "c
On 03/02/2012 10:46, K. Macy wrote:
> You understand my point but then fail to or choose not to see how it
> applies to you when it creates problems for you personally.
No, I already pointed out the distinction between "new, experimental
features;" and "essential components of the FreeBSD operatin
>
> ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our
> developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has
> increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall
> by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. That's no
> way to r
On 03/02/2012 03:44, K. Macy wrote:
>> Apparently you've missed all the times that I've given that exact advice. :)
>>
>> But your analogy is severely flawed. Flowtable was an experimental
>> feature that theoretically might have increased performance for some
>> work flows, but turned out to be fa
> Apparently you've missed all the times that I've given that exact advice. :)
>
> But your analogy is severely flawed. Flowtable was an experimental
> feature that theoretically might have increased performance for some
> work flows, but turned out to be fatally flawed. The ports system is an
> es
On 03/01/2012 16:03, K. Macy wrote:
> I understand the switch. Uptime is important in any production
> network. However, it seems like it may have been too easy to turn it
> off because no one has made any effort to help me debug the issues. By
> analogy your guidance for ports usability problems
> Yes, that was part of it. On the web and db systems we had what I can
> only describe as "general wackiness" with systems suddenly becoming
> unreachable, etc. This was with a moderately complex network setup with
> a combination of different VLANs, multiple interfaces, etc. The FreeBSD
> routers
On 2/29/2012 6:01 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
> On 02/29/12 13:17, K. Macy wrote:
>> .
>>>
>>> I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database
>>> servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability.
>>> Disabling the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved
>>> the proble
Inviato da iPad
Il giorno 01/mar/2012, alle ore 03:01, Steve Wills ha
scritto:
>
> The failure I experienced was with web servers running 8.0 behind a F5
> load balancer in an HA setup. Whenever the failover happened, the web
> servers would continue sending to the wrong MAC address, despite
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/29/12 13:17, K. Macy wrote:
> .
>>
>> I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database
>> servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability.
>> Disabling the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved
>> the problem
.
>
> I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database
> servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability. Disabling
> the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved the problems.
Routing I can believe, but I'm wondering how close attention you paid
to the workload. T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/28/2012 15:08, Florian Smeets wrote:
> I talked to Kip Macy, who implemented flowtable, about this. He
> thinks that the problem was caused by inappropriate default setting
> of net.inet.ip.output_flowtable_size. This should have been fixed
>
On 28.02.12 23:14, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 2/28/2012 10:48 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>> You will sure go really far with this kind of "It is broken ? Let's
>> not fix it and disable it instead" mentality, even more when coming
>> from a committer.
>>
>> As long as there will be these kind of commen
33 matches
Mail list logo
