similar to: About threads and bitrates and bytes...

Hallo everyone in the Icecast project. First of all i want to apologize in case this message should not be in this list but i believe this is the place to answer my question. I know only a little about icecast server. I would like to build up a live radio station. The concept is something like : the server is set up in some place and all producers broadcast themselves from their place, so

Sorry for repost, there was an sending error with my first posting. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi, I''m trying to get Xen running on 2 different systems and have massive packet losts independ from the system I use! This are the results from an UDP-Benchmark-Test from an Xen-Server to another one. As you make notice, the sending packets have a

Hi, I''m trying to get Xen running on 2 different systems and have massive packet losts independ from the system I use! This are the results from an UDP-Benchmark-Test from an Xen-Server to another one. As you make notice, the sending packets have a lost rate from > 80% up to 99%. What the hell is going on? I have no ideas. If I boot my 2 Xen-Servers with the normal kernel (without

Hi, samba 3.0.24, debian etch I'm seeing a strange effect with samba and traffic over a bond0 interface in round robin mode. 2 server each with 2 GbE interfaces as bond0 device ind rr mode. netio benchmark: NETIO - Network Throughput Benchmark, Version 1.26 (C) 1997-2005 Kai Uwe Rommel TCP connection established. Packet size 1k bytes: 182840 KByte/s Tx, 197599 KByte/s Rx. Packet size

On 11/14/2015 7:41 AM, Venkatesh Srinivas wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:34:33PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 04:21:07PM -0800, Venkatesh Srinivas wrote: >>> Improves cacheline transfer flow of available ring header. >>> >>> Virtqueues are implemented as a pair of rings, one producer->consumer >>> avail ring and

would like some input on this one please. Two CentOS 5.5 XEN servers, with 1GB NIC's, connected to a 1GB switch transfer files to each other at about 30MB/s between each other. Both servers have the following setup: CentOS 5.5 x64 XEN 1GB NIC's 7200rpm SATA HDD's The hardware configuration can't change, I need to use these servers as they are. They are both used in production

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 10:31:39AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2017?12?06? 03:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Users of ptr_ring expect that it's safe to give the > > data structure a pointer and have it be available > > to consumers, but that actually requires an smb_wmb > > or a stronger barrier. > > > > In absence of such barriers and

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 10:31:39AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2017?12?06? 03:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Users of ptr_ring expect that it's safe to give the > > data structure a pointer and have it be available > > to consumers, but that actually requires an smb_wmb > > or a stronger barrier. > > > > In absence of such barriers and

>>>> I've heard lots of discussion about it, >>>> but what I was taught in school was kilo >>>> was greek for 1000. In most usages "kilo XXX" >>>> means "1000 of XXX". This is correct, but... >>>> In electronics terms >>>> I understand we use it collectively wrong >>>> from a linguistic

Greating All, I have had to solve the following problem enough in the last month that I''m sure it has a name and a body of research behind it but I''m having trouble finding it. The general problem is this: I have a Site Model. Each Site has many Consumers and Producers. Producers make some amount of a "resource" available at the Site, while Consumers use these

Hi Michael, On 12/06/2017 12:59 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Users of ptr_ring expect that it's safe to give the > data structure a pointer and have it be available > to consumers, but that actually requires an smb_wmb > or a stronger barrier. This is not the exact situation we are seeing. Let me try to explain the situation Affected on ARM64 platform. 1) tun_net_xmit calls

I am having a strange problem. On one * box I setup the fax recive, via spandsp -app_rxfax I have no problem here. On a second box I did the same. The resulting PDF appear "corrupt". If I transmit the same fax to both * box, the tiff files received are the same. A deeper analysis shows the only problem is the width and heigth of the document In the first PDF, I see

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 02:51:41PM +0530, George Cherian wrote: > Hi Michael, > > > On 12/06/2017 12:59 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Users of ptr_ring expect that it's safe to give the > > data structure a pointer and have it be available > > to consumers, but that actually requires an smb_wmb > > or a stronger barrier. > This is not the exact

Hi all! I'm new to this list. I wanted to have an opinion of the situation i'm facing now (i'm no expert in LVM). Last week, i had to re-install a system which had a system hard drive crash (it was clunking before it definitely died!). It was running on SuSE 9.0 before. I just finished to install a fresh copy of CentOS 4.4 on a new hard disk. I want to know if it's possible

On 2017?12?06? 03:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Users of ptr_ring expect that it's safe to give the > data structure a pointer and have it be available > to consumers, but that actually requires an smb_wmb > or a stronger barrier. > > In absence of such barriers and on architectures that reorder writes, > consumer might read an un=initialized value from an skb pointer

OK folks, I'm back at it again. Instead of taking my J4400 ( 24 x 1T disks) and making a big RAID60 out of it which Linux cannot make a filesystem on, I'm created 4 x RAID6 which each are 3.64T I then do : sfdisk /dev/sd{b,c,d,e} <<EOF ,,8e EOF to make a big LVM partition on each one. But then when I do : pvcreate /dev/sd{b,c,d,e}1 and then pvdisplay It shows each one as

On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 20:44, Klaas Jan Wierenga wrote: > Q: When a client connects is the burst-size immediately added to the > queue-size? no. > If this is the case then the slack for a 16kpbs client goes down from 50 sec > (102400[queue-size] / 16kbps = 50 sec) to 18 seconds ( (102400 - > 65536[burst-size]) / 16kpbs = 18 sec). > > I'm experiencing quite a few of the

Hi Ive been reading, testing and applying what Iam reading in the LARTC tutorial for a couple of days, I do not wish to use ready made scripts because that means I will always come back and ask the same question again. So Ive been wondering if I have 10 computers and I do want to limit the download for each of those 10 computers to 10 kbyte per second. I would create a leaf class and match the

Hi Ive been reading, testing and applying what Iam reading in the LARTC tutorial for a couple of days, I do not wish to use ready made scripts because that means I will always come back and ask the same question again. So Ive been wondering if I have 10 computers and I do want to limit the download for each of those 10 computers to 10 kbyte per second. I would create a leaf class and match the

Dear Samba-Users, could you please help me with the following two questions: 1. How can I increase the maximum SMB-blocksize from currently 4 KByte to the "regular" 64 KByte with my Red Hat Samba-Client (The server is already configured to 64 KByte and with a Windows-client this SMB-blocksize can be used.) 2. How can I deactivate the buffer on the SMB-client, so that the same file is