search for: 201k

...I am confused. What exactly does that number and how is it calculated? Also what is the difference between datapool row and the raidz2 row in general? #>zpool iostat -v capacity operations bandwidth pool used avail read write read write ------------ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- datapool 201K 5.00T 0 0 33 381 raidz2 201K 5.00T 0 0 1 36 c7t2d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c7t3d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c7t4d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c7t5d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c8t1d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c8t2d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c8t3d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c8t4d0 - - 0 0 47 353 c8t5d0 - - 0 0 31 352 c8t6d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c8t7d0 - - 0 0 47 352 c7t6d0(slog)...

...fbfe4a4 in ?? () #9 0x00000004 in ?? () #10 0x00000000 in ?? () netstat -h 8: 118K 0 37M 204K 0 262M 0 121K 0 37M 204K 0 255M 0 124K 0 30M 204K 0 248M 0 116K 0 36M 201K 0 257M 0 117K 0 40M 202K 0 260M 0 120K 0 45M 205K 0 261M 0 120K 0 49M 201K 0 253M 0 106K 0 41M 178K 0 224M 0 6.8K 0 3.1M...

...LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `Shorewall:INPUT:REJECT:'' 0 0 reject all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 2 packets, 96 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 260 201K eth0_fwd all -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 297 43893 eth1_fwd all -- eth1 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 tunl_fwd all -- tunl+ * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 common all -- * *...

Running a zpool scrub on our production pool is showing a scrub rate of about 400K/s. (When this pool was first set up we saw rates in the MB/s range during a scrub). Both zpool iostat and an iostat -Xn show lots of idle disk times, no above average service times, no abnormally high busy percentages. Load on the box is .59. 8 x 3GHz, 32GB ram, 96 spindles arranged into raidz zdevs on OI 147.

...2("...", 8, 12 <unfinished ... > 28445 write(4, "\10\0YK\n\0\0\240\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0ZK\n\0\10\0 [K\n\0\0\240\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0 \0\0\0\0\0\\K\n\0\0\240\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0]K\n\0\10\0kK\n\0\10\0lK\n\0\0\240\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\ 0\0\0\0\0\0mK\n\0\10\0\201K\n\0\f\200\1\0\0\0\274\2\0\0\2\0\0\0\17\0\0\0\272\2\260\26\344\273\202K\n\0\10\0\20 4K\n\0\f\200\1\0\0\0\274\2\0\0\2\0\0\0Q\0\0\0\261\21\335\247\32\363\207K\n\0"..., 470 <unfinished ...> 28461 <... lchown32 resumed> ) = 0 28445 <... write resumed> ) = -1...

...:\unix\bin\cygreadline4.dll 121k 2002/01/13 c:\unix\bin\cygreadline5.dll 66k 2001/11/20 c:\unix\bin\cygregex.dll 156k 2002/01/16 c:\unix\bin\cygssl.dll 491k 2002/04/11 c:\unix\bin\cygtcl83.dll 5k 2002/04/11 c:\unix\bin\cygtclpip83.dll 253k 2002/02/10 c:\unix\bin\cygtiff3.dll 201k 2002/04/11 c:\unix\bin\cygtix4183.dll 762k 2002/04/11 c:\unix\bin\cygtk83.dll 50k 2002/03/12 c:\unix\bin\cygz.dll 751k 2002/02/25 c:\unix\bin\cygwin1.dll Cygwin DLL version info: DLL version: 1.3.10 DLL epoch: 19 DLL bad signal mask: 19005 DLL old...

I apologize for the first message. :) --------------------------------------- I have an FTP server running in the DMZ section of my home network. It uses port 23000 for connection and ports 19990 to 19994 for data transfer. I have setup the following rule for outside people to connect to it: DNAT net dmz:192.168.2.2 tcp 23000 I''m at work right now and I can''t use

...727b/8 mpu 0b level 0    Sent 206063 bytes 172 pkts (dropped 0, overlimits 0)    lended: 172 borrowed: 0 giants: 0    tokens: 174507 ctokens: 108032 ========================================================================= So we can see that before the TC rules, I Had about 537kbytes transfered (201k+168k+168k), after having applied the TC rules I''ve only got a total of 370.941 bytes !!!!!!!! Where have they gone ? I''ve also plotted a graph with gnuplot, showing me that (somehow) my rules were "correct", I''ve got an average value of 30kbits/s, a 10kbits/s a...