You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Brian Akins <br...@turner.com> on 2006/08/30 15:20:52 UTC
porstfs bug t2000 and 2.2
We tested a Sun t2000 with httpd 2.2. It did "okay." Now, Sun says
there is an issue with 2.2 and "portfs" on Solaris 10 on the t2000. Not
real sure what this means. Anyone else heard this?
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
Re: porstfs bug t2000 and 2.2
Posted by Shanti Subramanyam <Sh...@Sun.COM>.
Yes - there are issues with Apache on Solaris 10 when using SSL (nothing
to do with the T2000). We currently have two bugs outstanding :
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6375348
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6374503
In our testing, this causes about a 10-12% performance degradation, but
is not specific to Apache 2.2.If you run apache as root, there is no
degradation at all and should see improved performance with the T2000
crypto hardware.
As you correctly point out, the event port bug has been fixed so make
sure that your T2000 box has this patch.
We have just released 'Cool Stack' - optimized versions of apache and
other common OSS apps for SPARC (x86 coming soon). Please see
http://cooltools.sunsource.net/coolstack to download.
Shanti
PAE, Sun Microsystems
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de> wrote:
>
>> The most recent kernel update patch is 118833-20 (SPARC versions, X86
>> should be analogous).
>
>
> Yah, that bug has been fixed. (Paul reported the bug early on, I think.)
>
> We have also heard reports that the SSL crypto engine on the T2000's
> is horked. We've been told that upcoming firmware should resolve that
> issue.
>
> FWIW, we're going to be deploying httpd on one of the ASF's T2000 soon
> (it's going to eventually take over for our Itanium box). So, if it's
> unstable, we'll be finding out real soon now. -- justin
Re: porstfs bug t2000 and 2.2
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 8/30/06, Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de> wrote:
> The most recent kernel update patch is 118833-20 (SPARC versions, X86
> should be analogous).
Yah, that bug has been fixed. (Paul reported the bug early on, I think.)
We have also heard reports that the SSL crypto engine on the T2000's
is horked. We've been told that upcoming firmware should resolve that
issue.
FWIW, we're going to be deploying httpd on one of the ASF's T2000 soon
(it's going to eventually take over for our Itanium box). So, if it's
unstable, we'll be finding out real soon now. -- justin
Re: porstfs bug t2000 and 2.2
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
Look at Sun Alert 102485:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-26-102485-1
The bug should have been fixed with 118833-12 several months ago. Most
early evaluaters of Niagara with Apache 2.2 ran into kernel panics
because of the bug.
The most recent kernel update patch is 118833-20 (SPARC versions, X86
should be analogous).
Regards,
Rainer
Colm MacCarthaigh schrieb:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:20:52AM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
>> We tested a Sun t2000 with httpd 2.2. It did "okay." Now, Sun says
>> there is an issue with 2.2 and "portfs" on Solaris 10 on the t2000.
>
> It didn't do very well for me with Solaris 10 either.
>
>> Not real sure what this means. Anyone else heard this?
>
> Yep, it's event ports, which we support. How their implementation
> handles it, who knows :-)
>
Re: porstfs bug t2000 and 2.2
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:20:52AM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
> We tested a Sun t2000 with httpd 2.2. It did "okay." Now, Sun says
> there is an issue with 2.2 and "portfs" on Solaris 10 on the t2000.
It didn't do very well for me with Solaris 10 either.
> Not real sure what this means. Anyone else heard this?
Yep, it's event ports, which we support. How their implementation
handles it, who knows :-)
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net