From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Mar 26 11:14:26 1996 Return-Path: owner-stable Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA08894 for stable-outgoing; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:14:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ki.net (root@ki.net [142.77.249.8]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA08889 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:14:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (from scrappy@localhost) by ki.net (8.7.4/8.7.4) id OAA26587; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:13:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:13:38 -0500 (EST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: michael butler cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Stable not very stable In-Reply-To: <199603260336.OAA02953@asstdc.scgt.oz.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, michael butler wrote: > With ~100k articles a day from the limited newsfeed I receive for the last > 10 days, I think that counts as "working" :-) The motherboard is a Chinese > "no-name" flavour. The kernel's compiled with AHC_TAGENABLE and > QUEUE_FULL_SUPPORTED, NFS_ASYNC, NMBCLUSTERS=1024, CHILD_MAX=256, and > OPEN_MAX=256 and runs with the news spool, overview and active file-systems > mounted "async". > Not sure, but do any of these apply to the NCR SCSI controller? Or better yet, will any of them make any difference to the NCR SCSI controller? I have {CHILD/OPEN}_MAX set to 128 right now, NMBCLUSTERS set to default, but neither of those, I would think, would affect the SCSI controller itself. NFS_ASYNC? Again, I wouldn't think so...but ya never know. AHC_TAGENABLE sounds like an adaptec'ism...? QUEUE_FULL_SUPPORTED?? Thanks... Marc G. Fournier | POP Mail Telnet Acct DNS Hosting System | WWW Services Database Services | Knowledge, Administrator | | Information and scrappy@ki.net | WWW: http://www.ki.net | Communications, Inc