From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Mar 12 13:35:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6925237BC42 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2000 13:35:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA28378; Sun, 12 Mar 2000 14:07:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 14:07:38 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Howard Leadmon Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Buffer Problems and hangs in 4.0-CURRENT.. Message-ID: <20000312140738.P14279@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20000312132811.N14279@fw.wintelcom.net> <200003122118.QAA33520@account.abs.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <200003122118.QAA33520@account.abs.net>; from howardl@account.abs.net on Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 04:18:19PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Howard Leadmon [000312 13:50] wrote: > > > > Not a whole lot done, I had the MAXUSERS set to 128, though am about to > > > bump it to 256 when I rebuild to see if that helps. I used to have some > > > tunables for BSDI when I used it, but when I tried to apply them to FBSD > > > it bitched about them being unknown so I just left them out. Was also > > > going to move NMBCLUSTERS up to 20480, not sure if thats the solution or > > > not. I can post the whole config if desired, but really it's very close > > > to the GENERIC except I added SOFTUPDATES, and removed all the drivers I > > > didn't need for my system to hopefully slim it down some.. > > > > grrrr, you _still_ haven't even told me how much RAM is in the box > > and what else it does if anything. > > > > Without that kind of information I'm not too comfortable giving > > advice on tuneables because I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TUNING :), when > > I've just blindly told people to increase NMBCLUSTERS they've had > > other problems because the kernel's network buffers wired down all > > the machine's memory. > > > > Yes, increasing NMBLCUSTERS is a good thing, but without your > > configuration it's hard to say how much to increase it. > > > > -- > > -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] > > > Sorry, thought you were asking about the kernel configs, not the > hardware configs. Here is my current running config via dmesg, as > I think that covers it all.. > > > Copyright (c) 1992-2000 The FreeBSD Project. ... > real memory = 402587648 (393152K bytes) > config> q > avail memory = 387334144 (378256K bytes) > Programming 24 pins in IOAPIC #0 > IOAPIC #0 intpin 2 -> irq 0 > FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor motherboard > cpu0 (BSP): apic id: 0, version: 0x00040011, at 0xfee00000 > cpu1 (AP): apic id: 1, version: 0x00040011, at 0xfee00000 > io0 (APIC): apic id: 2, version: 0x00170011, at 0xfec00000 > > Did I miss anything important you need?? No that's fine, I run several machines with maxusers at 512 and NMBCLUSTERS at 32768 (although the ram is usually at 512 to a 1024), let me know if you have any problems with those settings though as I'd like to know if they are set too high for heavy load. I would also suggest using fxp cards (Intel Ether Express Pro) in the future, they are definetly my favorite. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message