Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 01:15:40 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Panic in FFS/4.0 as of yesterday Message-ID: <199902190915.BAA31066@apollo.backplane.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902190844430.61913-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Matthew Jacob wrote:
:
:> Oh, btw- I should clarify a little about this test and some spice to the
:> mix... The same test on a system that is 25% of the cpu power and 25% of
:> the memory running solaris 2.7 Intel not only successfully has always runs
:> this test but also retains a quite acceptable responsiveness. Please don't
:> make me claim Slowlaris is better!
:
:I'm sure that something very wrong is happening, don't worry. Hopefully, I
:will be able to see something.
:
:--
:Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com
:Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037
I've started testing the VN device. So far I've found it to be
extremely unstable when using an NFSV2 or NFSV3 file as backing
store. I'm going to try using an MFS based file as backing store
next to see whether the problem is with the VN device or the NFS device.
I've gotten the bmsafemap softupdates panic with softupdates mounted
filesystems sitting on top of VN, but that was with the NFS-backed VN
test which was unstable even without softupdates so I don't know if
that is a real crash.
I haven't tried reproducing the softupdates panic on its own merits
yet. I want to fix VN first.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199902190915.BAA31066>