Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:24:57 +0200
From:      Gerrit =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=FChn?= <gerrit@pmp.uni-hannover.de>
To:        Daniele Bastianini <liste.bsd@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: broken re(4)
Message-ID:  <20080611092457.82c83083.gerrit@pmp.uni-hannover.de>
In-Reply-To: <3C916EEA-5A2B-4C88-B834-0F47D7D525FA@gmail.com>
References:  <20080527165232.2acbb00f.gerrit@pmp.uni-hannover.de> <3C916EEA-5A2B-4C88-B834-0F47D7D525FA@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:43:04 +0200 Daniele Bastianini
<liste.bsd@gmail.com> wrote about Re: broken re(4):

DB> > - copying large files (more than some 100MB) via ssh/scp drops the
DB> > connection due to "corrupted MAC on input":
DB> > Disconnecting: Corrupted MAC on input.
DB> > lost connection

DB> I had the same problem.
DB> I fixed it (for now) making a buildworld with
DB> *default date=2008.03.01.00.00.00 in my src csup configuration.

DB> I'm not so skilled to investigate in the sources but the problem is  
DB> after this date.

For me all versions from cvs and all patches from Pyun are working now,
after I have solved the issue with the bad riser card. I still think it's
funny that the riser causes this kind of trouble for the networking chips.

On the other hand, I have not been able to get more than about 10MByte/s
through the interfaces of this particular system. I have 1GBit-networking
equipment, and the other systems (which are used as router) have no
problem doing a throughput of >20MB/s. Even bonding the two interfaces
using lagg(4) does not improve the performance - where else could be the
bottleneck?
The only difference here is that I have the extra SATA-controller with
disks in there. However, the disks appear to be as fast as I can expect
from a SATA150-interface.


cu
  Gerrit



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080611092457.82c83083.gerrit>