From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 17 20:15:18 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF6D916A4CE; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:15:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from relay.bestcom.ru (relay.bestcom.ru [217.72.144.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B0D143D49; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:15:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (root@cell.sick.ru [217.72.144.68]) by relay.bestcom.ru (8.13.1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j0HKFG5Z043942 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:15:17 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (glebius@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.sick.ru (8.12.11/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j0HKFGjD090959 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:15:16 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.sick.ru (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j0HKFFir090958; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:15:16 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.sick.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@freebsd.org using -f Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:15:15 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: hydros Message-ID: <20050117201515.GB90866@cell.sick.ru> Mail-Followup-To: Gleb Smirnoff , hydros , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <1116933942.20050109134050@mail.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1116933942.20050109134050@mail.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version devel-20041013, clamav-milter version 0.75l on 127.0.0.1 X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:25:26 +0000 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pppoe perfomance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:15:19 -0000 On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 01:40:50PM +0300, hydros wrote: h> Does anyone tested a perfomance of pppoe+freebsd as server? h> How much cpu\ram does it east with a different vpn load. h> I`m trying to make a server and not sure does the hardware would be able to h> serve my LAN users h> server pII-450 h> ram 256mb h> hdd 10gb h> NIC realtek rl0 10\100mbit(working at 10mbit speed) 256 Mb RAM is more than enough. If you are going to run PPPoE using mpd than you should estimate machine CPU resources as for router of plain Ethernet segments. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 19 10:06:14 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3057B16A4CE; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:06:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from as.itesm.mx (as.itesm.mx [200.34.200.251]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7860C43D2D; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:06:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ccardena@itesm.mx) X-Ironport-AV: i="3.88,137,1102312800"; d="scan'208"; a="47693860:sNHT12885628" Received: from [137.194.164.47] by itesm.mx with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 04:06:11 -0600 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:06:11 +0100 Message-ID: <41EE0B1E00000045@mailserver1.itesm.mx> In-Reply-To: <41E11BD300003B8D@mailserver3.itesm.mx> From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?C=E9sar=20C=E1rdenas?= To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org Subject: Turning off a partition X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: ccardena@itesm.mx List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:06:14 -0000 Dear all, I am using FreeBSD 4.5 Release P20... In order to increase slice space because I have "File System Full Errors"= . I need to turn off (inactiving) device "ad0s1e"... How I can do that? I appreciate any help on this issue, have a nice day, C=E9sar C=E1rdenas (ccardena@itesm.mx) Electronics and Computer Science Department Monterrey Tech, Quer=E9taro Campus http://www.qro.itesm.mx Personal Phone: +(33) 625249469 Office Phone: +(33) 145817146 Office Fax: +(33) 145817158 All phones and fax from abroad France The content of this data transmission is not considered as an offer, prop= osal, understanding, or agreement unless it is confirmed in a document signed by a legal representative of ITESM. The content of this data transmission= is confidential and it is intended to be delivered only to the addresses,= therefore, it shall not be distributed and/or disclosed through any mean without the original sender's previous authorization. If you are not the addressee you are forbidden to use it, either totally or partially, for any purpose. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 20 17:36:12 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B9616A4CF for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:36:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from otter3.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D7343D46 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:36:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by otter3.centtech.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id j0KHa9OJ097407; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:36:09 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <41EFEBFE.8050505@centtech.com> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:35:58 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041110 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Tancsa References: <6.2.0.14.0.20050111170523.07c60600@64.7.153.2> <41E54C20.9060101@centtech.com> <6.2.0.14.0.20050112113257.07ca0c08@64.7.153.2> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.0.20050112113257.07ca0c08@64.7.153.2> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS and SAMBA on RELENG_5 vs RELENG_4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:36:12 -0000 Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 11:11 AM 12/01/2005, Eric Anderson wrote: > > >> Mike - let me know if you want any tweaks that I've done for anything >> specific. > > > Hi, > Yes, by all means please post any suggestions you have. I am > going to take the time and try and test a bit with a half dozen client > machines on both RELENG_4 and RELENG_5 to see what differences there > are. If you can suggest some benchmark tools / methods that would be > great. I can tell you this - you must increase the number of nfsd threads to a high number, if you plan on really hammering the machine with nfs and lots of clients. I recompiled the nfsd binary with it tweaked to allow 256 threads, and that still isn't quite enough. You need something on the order of: 1 per active machine using nfs * 1.10. The hard part is finding out how many active machines you have. I usually start with about 20% of my total machines mounted to the server, and then watch the nfsd threads cpu time. If the lowest thread is using more than about 3-4% of the time of the 10-15th top nfsd process, then you need to bump up the number. That may be confusing.. The other thing you can do, as an easy general beef up, is bump the maxusers sysctl to something higher, like 512. As you beat on the server, you should also watch nmbufs via netstat -m and all it has to offer. You may want to tweak some other tcp sysctl's (like send and recv space) by bumping them up a notch. I have found that lots of memory is a key to a good fast NFS server, and of course decent NICs that don't hog cpu time and a good disk subsystem (hardware RAID50, 10, or 5, depending on your needs). There's more, but I can't think of them right now.. :) Let me know if you have specific questions.. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology I have seen the future and it is just like the present, only longer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------