Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "830k".
Did you mean:
830
2018 Nov 02
2
[PATCH 0/1] vhost: add vhost_blk driver
...C D E F G
>
> 1 171k 151k 148k 151k 195k 187k 175k
> 2 328k 302k 249k 241k 349k 334k 296k
> 3 479k 437k 179k 174k 501k 464k 404k
> 4 622k 568k 143k 183k 620k 580k 492k
> 5 755k 697k 136k 128k 737k 693k 579k
> 6 887k 808k 131k 120k 830k 782k 640k
> 7 1004k 926k 126k 131k 926k 863k 693k
> 8 1099k 1015k 117k 115k 1001k 931k 712k
> 9 1194k 1119k 115k 111k 1055k 991k 711k
> 10 1278k 1207k 109k 114k 1130k 1046k 695k
> 11 1345k 1280k 110k 108k 1119k 1091k 663k
> 12 1411k 1356k 104k 106k 1201k 1142k 629k
>...
2002 Jul 13
1
win2k client slow with samba 2.2.3.a - maybe a bug?
...2.3a up to use security = SHARE as this appears to be the closest
to what the OS/2 Warp4 based system supports. All clients are able to
access the files on the Samba service but loading files from the
Win2k client takes many times longer than any of the other clients.
For example, to load and run a 830K program from the OS/2 based file
server takes about two seconds on all Windows clients (98, NT4, and
2k) but on the Samba server the same program takes about two seconds
when loaded from 98 or NT4 but when loaded from a Win2k client takes
anywhere from 12 to 17 seconds.
Here is the smb.conf file I...
2018 Nov 05
2
[PATCH 0/1] vhost: add vhost_blk driver
...B C D E F G
>
> 1 171k 151k 148k 151k 195k 187k 175k
> 2 328k 302k 249k 241k 349k 334k 296k
> 3 479k 437k 179k 174k 501k 464k 404k
> 4 622k 568k 143k 183k 620k 580k 492k
> 5 755k 697k 136k 128k 737k 693k 579k
> 6 887k 808k 131k 120k 830k 782k 640k
> 7 1004k 926k 126k 131k 926k 863k 693k
> 8 1099k 1015k 117k 115k 1001k 931k 712k
> 9 1194k 1119k 115k 111k 1055k 991k 711k
> 10 1278k 1207k 109k 114k 1130k 1046k 695k
> 11 1345k 1280k 110k 108k 1119k 1091k 663k
> 12 1411k 1356k 104k 106k 1201k 1142k 629k
>...
2018 Nov 05
2
[PATCH 0/1] vhost: add vhost_blk driver
...B C D E F G
>
> 1 171k 151k 148k 151k 195k 187k 175k
> 2 328k 302k 249k 241k 349k 334k 296k
> 3 479k 437k 179k 174k 501k 464k 404k
> 4 622k 568k 143k 183k 620k 580k 492k
> 5 755k 697k 136k 128k 737k 693k 579k
> 6 887k 808k 131k 120k 830k 782k 640k
> 7 1004k 926k 126k 131k 926k 863k 693k
> 8 1099k 1015k 117k 115k 1001k 931k 712k
> 9 1194k 1119k 115k 111k 1055k 991k 711k
> 10 1278k 1207k 109k 114k 1130k 1046k 695k
> 11 1345k 1280k 110k 108k 1119k 1091k 663k
> 12 1411k 1356k 104k 106k 1201k 1142k 629k
>...
2018 Nov 05
0
[PATCH 0/1] vhost: parallel virtqueue handling
...rameter to other stuffs to control the number of threads I
believe.
Thanks
>
> # num-queues
> # bare metal
> # virtio-blk
> # vhost-blk
>
> 1 171k 148k 195k
> 2 328k 249k 349k
> 3 479k 179k 501k
> 4 622k 143k 620k
> 5 755k 136k 737k
> 6 887k 131k 830k
> 7 1004k 126k 926k
> 8 1099k 117k 1001k
> 9 1194k 115k 1055k
> 10 1278k 109k 1130k
> 11 1345k 110k 1119k
> 12 1411k 104k 1201k
> 13 1466k 106k 1260k
> 14 1517k 103k 1296k
> 15 1552k 102k 1322k
> 16 1480k 101k 1346k
>
> Vitaly Mayatskikh (1):
> vhost: ad...
2013 Dec 09
1
10.0-BETA4 (upgraded from 9.2-RELEASE) zpool upgrade -> boot failure
Hi,
Is there anything known about ZFS under 10.0-BETA4 when FreeBSD was
upgraded from 9.2-RELEASE?
I have two servers, with very different hardware (on is with soft raid
and the other have not) and after a zpool upgrade, no way to get the
server booting.
Do I miss something when upgrading?
I cannot get the error message for the moment. I reinstalled the raid
server under Linux and the other