01:37:40 <r0ni> fbsd still says p3 on uname after installing p4...
01:38:48 <cpet> if it doesnt require anything kernel
01:38:53 <cpet> it will remain
01:39:01 <cpet> byt freebsd-version will show p4
01:40:42 <r0ni> ahh i get it. would the kern say p4 if i had built it from source or does even that say p3 still?
01:42:23 <cpet> if freebsd-version says p4 youre good to go
01:42:31 <cpet> stop worrying and go play scorn
01:43:00 <r0ni> not worried, just OCD and it annoys the shit out of me
01:43:34 <cpet> dont know what OCD means
01:43:46 <r0ni> go play scorn then ;)
01:43:56 <cpet> did not like the game ;/
01:44:47 <r0ni> i've not even heard of it, so you're one up on me
01:45:12 <cpet> indie horror game
01:45:41 <r0ni> oh boy, have to build rust again... guess I'll check in on portmaster later lol
01:45:56 <cpet> pkg why compile
01:47:15 <r0ni> cuz i run ports, tbh i don't even know what pulled rust into the mix. don't need it that i'm aware of, i just let it do what it says it needs to do
01:47:47 <cpet> gotta customize eh?
01:47:50 <r0ni> ports is 90% the reason why i'm using freebsd
01:48:47 <r0ni> i do have custom installs for postfix, dovecot, etc
01:50:21 <cpet> have 2TB of space. worry about 5 MB worth of deps
02:34:02 <rtprio> r0ni: did you reboot after installing the kernel? and where does it say p3?
02:35:59 <cpet> he mentioned uname
02:52:20 <jmnbtslsQE> if a  virtio device reports 512 byte sectors in diskinfo, gpart, etc, but zpool creates with ashift=12, should i trust zfs or force ashift to be 9?
03:00:32 <cpet> isnt 512 still the default
03:04:05 <jmnbtslsQE> cpet: not sure, but i'm second guessing myself because this existing pool has ashift=12 but now new pools have ashift=9 as expected..maybe the  existing pool was somehow created with 12
03:05:47 <jmnbtslsQE> just going to go with 512-byte then for the new pool
03:06:35 <cpet> well once you install with 512 cant upgrade to 4k
03:08:21 <cpet> depending on the device it may help or degrade
03:09:13 <jmnbtslsQE> yeh it's a virtual disk though so never going to change i assume. not sure what the host intends or what the actual underlying size is but if it's reported at 512 then seems the best
03:09:17 <cpet> but if this is a desktop doesnt really matter if this is a server then yeah but only if you have a ssd or nve drive
03:10:22 <jmnbtslsQE> wonder if there is a good way to test performance of random read/write from within the install cd before i install and get along with the setup
03:10:42 <cpet> do you have ports ?
03:11:17 <jmnbtslsQE> i suppose i can set that up creating a temporary system on disk just for this purpose
03:11:28 <jmnbtslsQE> is there a port?
03:12:13 <cpet> theres bonnie and bonnie++
03:12:45 <jmnbtslsQE> nice..will try thanks
03:13:38 <vortexx> jmnbtslsQE: if it's for windows server I'd recommend 4096 block size, you'll run into all kinds of issues with databases otherwise
03:13:57 <cpet> I honestly dont know the difference in 512 and 4096 I just install GPT and it defaults to 4k
03:15:04 <jmnbtslsQE> OK, well it's just for this freebsd VPS, i'm inside the VPS though, i'm not the provider, so just gauging based on what i see inside. haven't asked the host yet but i will test performance with the tools with both 512 and 4096 to see
03:15:12 <jmnbtslsQE> vortexx: ^
03:15:45 <cpet> UEFI + GPT defaults to 4k
03:16:05 <jmnbtslsQE> OK
03:16:33 <cpet> I would just reinstall if its new and use the web base VNC
03:16:51 <jmnbtslsQE> the underlying  virtio disk is reporting 512 i guess so hence supecting that the host intends 512 (e..g maybue throttles on the basis of iops for 512 byte blocks)
03:17:02 <cpet> had a provider default to UFS rather ZFAS despite the server having 24gb of rams
03:17:04 <cpet> so :)
03:17:18 <jmnbtslsQE> yeh this is a new node so just testing it out before i actually  install my zpool
03:17:28 <rtprio> good idea
03:17:32 <cpet> zfs is more of a ram issue
03:17:43 <rtprio> eh.... no it isn't
03:17:50 <cpet> if the VPS has small ram not reallt recomended without tuning the hell out of it
03:19:06 <cpet> pretty much it is if you arent using say hammer which doesnt hog all the rams
03:19:23 <rtprio> with 24gb i think there's plenty of ram
03:19:53 <cpet> this is my personal ded server I really doubt his VPS has 24gb of ram
03:20:23 <jmnbtslsQE> so far i just set arcmax and use ufs on zpool for certain pieces of data that are operated on intensely, and it seems fine, the performance of another node on this host was pretty bad but i think it may be because they throttle iops (not intended to b ea fast disk) and possibly bvecause i used 4096 instead of 512
03:20:59 <cpet> welcome to the woprld of VPS
03:21:04 <rtprio> elliot@phil:~$ sysctl -a hw.physmem
03:21:04 <rtprio> hw.physmem: 34321428480
03:21:05 <cpet> you share IO cpu
03:21:11 <jmnbtslsQE> heh this one has 1GB memory
03:21:26 <jmnbtslsQE> cpet:  well never had this issue on other hosts at least to this extent
03:21:33 <cpet> hw.physmem: 16427266048
03:21:46 <cpet> every host is different
03:22:00 <jmnbtslsQE> indeed
03:22:11 <cpet> in my personal opinion andf again my personal opinion anything from the US is garbage for what you pay
03:22:52 <cpet> i pay 46/m for a full ded server with 24gb of ram and 2 x 512 SSD and 1TB HD
03:23:07 <cpet> nor running zfs with 1gb is frowned upon
03:23:14 <jmnbtslsQE> europe isn't better is it?
03:23:17 <cpet> but you can tune it
03:23:24 <cpet> this server is in germany
03:23:38 <jmnbtslsQE> ah i see
03:23:50 <jmnbtslsQE> it's definietly a lower price than what you would find in the US i agree
03:24:32 <cpet> https://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide
03:24:33 <VimDiesel> Title: ZFSTuningGuide - FreeBSD Wiki
03:24:36 <cpet> may need to play with that
03:24:45 <cpet> but you can make zfs run decent with 1gb
03:25:07 <cpet> desktop has 32GB ded server has 24GB and server has 16GB so I have some play
03:25:12 <cpet> you dont :)
03:26:09 <jmnbtslsQE> ye hi've  read that a few times, honestly i think the issues i had with the other node here was throttling + possibly wrong sector, or at least in any case, it's specific tot his provider not my config
03:26:27 <cpet> dont think they throttle you just share
03:26:34 <cpet> if another is compiling world
03:26:38 <cpet> you will feel it
03:27:16 <cpet> this is why you look at bare metal discount server
03:27:30 <cpet> https://contabo.com/en/server-outlet/
03:27:34 <VimDiesel> Title: Discount Dedicated Servers | Contabo
03:27:41 <cpet> chepa isnt the way to go when it comes to serving
03:28:05 <jmnbtslsQE> it's a good question i'm not too familiar with virtualised environments but the disk can be quite slow, to the extent that i wonder what this underlying storage actually is - maybe not even a directly connected spinning disk. pretty much always the same performance over 12 months
03:28:22 <cpet> again you are sharing IO with x people on the same server
03:28:39 <cpet> even if they mention SSD or NVE having 20 VM ..
03:29:02 <jmnbtslsQE> it's designed to be a large non-fast disk which is one clue to me that it's throttled specifically or something similar
03:29:24 <cpet> well depends on what you will use it for
03:29:36 <cpet> a small site or a enterpsie site
03:29:41 <jmnbtslsQE> not doing much serious with this but i do want to put poudriere on it
03:29:52 <cpet> I was lucky enough to get this server in a discount
03:29:53 <jmnbtslsQE> so going to put poudriere ina  jail and do RCTL
03:30:17 <cpet> do you have a reason to compile by hand or just benching IO
03:30:22 <jmnbtslsQE> cpet: that you one linked is theone you mentioned before?
03:30:28 <cpet> yeah
03:30:29 <jmnbtslsQE> typically compilking so i can choose options
03:30:34 <jmnbtslsQE> ah nice
03:30:43 <cpet> I dont use anything from the US all my services are from EU
03:30:56 <jmnbtslsQE> well, don't need any extra now but if i do i will take a look at that
03:30:56 <cpet> you get way more for the buck
03:31:17 <cpet> well think about that as freebsd doesnt like to grow it's FW
03:31:24 <cpet> it works but doesnt like it
03:31:45 <jmnbtslsQE> FW ?
03:31:48 <cpet> FS
03:31:54 <jmnbtslsQE> OK
03:33:01 <cpet> what exactly are you using this for ?
03:34:26 <jmnbtslsQE> miscellaneous
03:35:12 <jmnbtslsQE> most of the important things are on the bare metal servers in the safehouse(s)
03:38:39 <cpet> if thats the case why do issue with 512 or 4k ?
03:40:40 <jmnbtslsQE> well, i'd like to put this to use since i've paid upfront, and if i have a chance to fix the performance issue i experienced, worth checking the sector size. can't run poudriere on it if it's performing the way it was
03:41:21 <jmnbtslsQE> 160 hours building rust then it timed out because i forgot to raise the timeout beyond 10 days.. heh
03:41:30 <jmnbtslsQE> no need to build rust spefifically but it's a dependency
03:41:43 <cpet> pkg install rust
03:41:51 <cpet> why the hell do you need to compile it ?
03:41:58 <cpet> especially on a 1gb VPS ?
03:42:06 <jmnbtslsQE> have not set up poudriere's use of repo-installed pkg
03:42:12 <jmnbtslsQE> is that possible?
03:42:33 <jmnbtslsQE> i guesss, just need to tell it to skip it
03:43:05 <jmnbtslsQE> but there is also the possibility of the freebsd repo not being in-sync with my system, same ABI, etc. forgot how that works
03:43:24 <cpet> again why do you needf poudriere for rust ?
03:43:24 <jmnbtslsQE> i think it only matters if my minor version is not the latest, right?
03:43:31 <cpet> nuking the hell out of this
03:43:35 <jmnbtslsQE> rust is just the dependency
03:44:13 <cpet> then you can just instal it and worry about the actual program
03:45:04 <jmnbtslsQE> i've always been cautious about mixing repo-installed pkg and ports-built
03:45:16 <cpet> pourdiere is a build system as far as I know it cant fetch and install pkg
03:45:25 <cpet> it build once then uses the cache to make it quicker
03:45:41 <cpet> if you dont install portd with options doesnt matter
03:45:49 <cpet> just a waste of time if you dont need too
03:45:56 <jmnbtslsQE> yeh i do use options, that's the main reason
03:46:09 <r0ni> rtprio: yes uname still says p3 as the kernel has no update(s)
03:46:14 <cpet> well you do you then
03:46:24 <jmnbtslsQE> OK
03:46:33 <rtprio> r0ni: you have to reboot after installing your new kernel
03:46:35 <cpet> r0ni, freebsd-update if it says p4 youre good
03:49:25 <r0ni> yes, i'm aware that one needs to reboot and yes its also at p4... just a kernel thing I find annoying
03:49:55 <cpet> if you dont need to update the kernel why update it just to see the pX
03:53:33 <Oleg1> why was the graphical logo removed from the efi loader? it's been replaced by the ascii logo.
03:53:59 <cpet> been replace with a perdy logo
04:00:35 <Oleg1> the text-based logo was replaced by a graphical logo a long time ago. so, why did they decide to go back to the text-based logo?
04:01:00 <cpet> version
04:01:55 <Oleg1> today's version of freebsd-current
04:06:45 <cpet> freebsd detect the system and uses either UEFI or syscons
04:06:58 <Oleg1> what?
04:07:12 <cpet> older systems will likely use syscons which is ascii while the uefi uses the newer BMP/PCX
04:07:13 <Oleg1> I just said that the text-based logo is a part of the efi loader.
04:07:42 <cpet> ok
04:07:59 <cpet> you also fail to provide actual issues configs and other files
04:08:01 <cpet> so ...
04:08:54 <Oleg1> is there a tunable that I can put into loader.conf to enable the graphical logo?
04:11:30 <cpet> should be auto based on what the system detects
04:24:21 <Oleg1> According to this: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/boot-menu-logos.81216 , the uefi loader always displays the graphical logo, so, why does my efi loader display the ascii-style logo?
04:24:22 <VimDiesel> Title: Boot Menu Logos | The FreeBSD Forums
04:32:43 <cpet> booting in legacy mode
04:33:47 <Oleg1> can someone please explain this mystery to me?.. if my system uses the uefi mode, why does the boot loader display the ascii logo, instead of the graphical one?
04:34:41 <cpet> any reason why you dont post configs ?
04:39:05 <Oleg1> cpet: I have zfs_load=YES in my loader.conf
04:40:48 <cpet> conole isnt the same as a FS
04:41:27 <Oleg1> maybe there is something in my uefi bios settings that prevents the orb graphical logo from showing up.
04:43:12 <Oleg1> cpet: I have only one one line in loader.conf. why would it prevent the graphical logo from showing up?
04:44:46 <Oleg1> I guess I'll reboot and take a look at my uefi bios settings
04:53:22 <Oleg1> this is so strange
06:56:13 <Sircle> How can I change key mappings e.g change left alt with ctrl. Change /swap capslock and Esc key?
12:00:08 <DynamiteDan> icky
12:00:14 <DynamiteDan> ok
12:00:18 <DynamiteDan> bootcamp is tricky
12:00:24 <DynamiteDan> and windows 11 can't be installed
14:25:11 <Sircle> Anyone who was "ever" able to crash Linux AND a freebsd OS?
14:26:05 <hackkitten> haven't killed a FreeBSD install yet, but have murdered lots of Linux installations
14:26:16 <hackkitten> mostly due to the package managers, though
14:26:39 <Sircle> ayecee which os has least crash ration? I heard freebsd is "hard" to crash even intentionally by mere system load but crashing linux with intentional heavy load is just implicit to happen? true?
14:26:54 <Sircle> hackkitten ^
14:28:13 <Sircle> hackkitten do I make an sense/
14:29:07 <satanist> what do you mean by crash unable to use the os, kernelpanik or need to manual repair the instalation?
14:29:47 <hackkitten> FreeBSD in my view has an advantage because it's a singular distribution, not just another variation of packages tossed around a kernel variation
14:30:04 <hackkitten> means less chance of those sneaky kernel space bugs
14:31:00 <satanist> now thinking about it, I was able to crash linux and freebsd (under all my definitions)
14:31:55 <Sircle> I need an OS which does not freeze regardless of load. It can decide to performe  limit as per hardware capacity but it can "not" freeze
14:32:19 <Sircle> or an OS close to above said
14:32:28 <hackkitten> get an IBM Power mainframe with their UNIX variant
14:32:38 <hackkitten> costs a bit, but it's virtually bulletproof
14:32:49 <hackkitten> plus you get to hotswap CPUs
14:32:57 <Sircle> hackkitten ok which os?
14:36:51 <hackkitten> z/OS, for z-architecture
14:36:52 <hackkitten> :D
14:37:04 <hackkitten> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_System_z
14:37:05 <VimDiesel> Title: IBM Z - Wikipedia
14:37:30 <hackkitten> the alternative is to use fall-over services within the same network
16:08:43 <debdrup> Use rctl(8) to throttle things.
16:09:22 <debdrup> Or just use cpuset(8) to reserve at least one core for only FreeBSD to use.
16:09:47 <debdrup> That's effectively what mainframes do.
17:40:01 <jafarlihi> Is there backup of old FreeBSD Perforce data somewhere?
17:41:04 <jafarlihi> Stuff that used to be in perforce.freebsd.org:1666
18:10:30 <debdrup> Maybe on ftp-archive.freebsd.org ?
18:10:41 <debdrup> I'm pretty sure I've seen it _somewhere_
18:10:49 <debdrup> What, in particular, are you looking for?
18:47:48 <Felgorn> is freebsd performant on a laptop/desktop or should i go with linux?
18:47:52 <Felgorn> if i want performance
18:49:50 <rtprio> performance of what? try it and compare for yourself
18:50:11 <rtprio> no one here is going to stay, "sure folgers, linux has better performance if you're playing tuxracer"
18:54:57 <Felgorn> rtprio for things like multithreading etc
18:55:30 <Felgorn> you mean to say performance is subjective or we can't know?
18:56:09 <Felgorn> for example they say the network stack of freebsd is much more performant, is this subjective also?
20:24:37 <rwp> I have not benchmarked either performance or power but I would guess that performance would be very similar on both FreeBSD and Linux.  But I think Linux has more power saving features.  Linux is definitely better for WiFi.
21:24:43 <dkeav> would performance even matter when talking about laptop hardware, they tend to be inherently inferior to a proper workstation
21:24:53 <dkeav> the point there is mobility not performance
21:27:00 <DrNick42> IMO it's all pretty meaningless unless you're testing a certain use case on both freebsd and linux on the same hardware. saying "performance on laptops is better on x" doesn't really make much sense
21:27:13 <nacelle> a one year old laptop OCcan cream a ten year old workstation.
21:27:24 <nacelle> s/OC//
21:28:22 <nacelle> the comparison is basically subjective and asking for finite resolution where there's none to be found from any of us.  only trying the various environments with the intended tasks will the real answer become apparent, I think.
21:40:03 <dkeav> aside from say nixos with a declarative/reproduceable environment, giving up boot environments is not enough to sway towards linux, performance be damned
21:40:23 <KungFuJesus> tsoome: https://code.illumos.org/c/illumos-gate/+/2510 typo, line 196
21:42:25 <KungFuJesus> on smb_node.c
21:48:01 <tsoome> wrong channel but thanks!
22:50:42 <antranigv> test
22:50:45 <antranigv> ok, it works
22:50:48 <antranigv> hi all
22:53:01 <V_PauAmma_V> 'lo.
22:55:38 <rtyler> I have a new 13.1 install with ZFS, and it looks like ZFS is going off of the device numbers, which change when I connect additional drives, causing the machine not to boot. I'm trying to figure out the appropriate way to configure this zpool so that it will always boot properly
22:56:23 <rtyler> For whatever reason, when I add or remove disks from the PCI-X sata controller, they show up as ada0,1,2,etc and offset everything from the builtin controller by that much >_<
22:56:56 <rtyler> Basically this problem but I don't see a satisfactory solution here: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/how-find-numeric-id-of-drive-zfs.62475/
22:56:57 <VimDiesel> Title: ZFS - How find numeric id of drive zfs? | The FreeBSD Forums
23:19:50 <antranigv> so what's the official place that developers hang out these days? is it the discord server? is it an IRC chat? do we have any of that documented?
23:25:13 <la_mettrie> some of those more specific dev channels mentioned on the freebsd IRC channel list are fairly active
23:27:14 <Molnija> rtyler: pci-x?
23:27:41 <Molnija> like, the old high-bandwidth pci?
23:27:43 <rtyler> PCI-E I think I mean, can never keep those straight
23:28:16 <Molnija> express (newer) vs extended (older), totally not confoofing
23:28:46 <Molnija> pcie is rarely written with a dash
23:30:13 <Erhard> The trademark is PCIe
23:30:21 <Erhard> Or PCI Express
23:34:57 <rtprio> rtyler: what kind of pool? i would suggest putting zfs boot blocks on all drives so it doesn't matter the order
23:36:32 <rtyler> There are efi and gpt boot partitions on all the drives, the problem is that if I attach or detach drives to the other controller, that throws the boot because it then thinks that this other device is part of the pool when it's not
23:37:26 <rtyler> Basically I installed, I had two drives that were not part of that pool, the show up as ada0, ada1. If I remove those drives, the four in my zpool have their numbers decremented by two, and then there are problems booting correctly
23:39:38 <rtprio> can you not set one of the correct drives in the bios? or still zfs gets confused?
23:48:43 <rtyler> What do you mean by setting them?
23:50:08 <rtprio> twsed them as the boot device
23:50:14 <rtprio> set them as the boot device
23:51:31 <tmp_> Am I getting this right that when you run `zpool status` the members show up as ada2 and ada3 (or some partition thereof)?
23:52:32 <rtyler> they're already set as the boot device, the machine will boot but then will fail out to single user mode because it gets confused about the status of the zpool if the numbers of these drives aren't exact, meaning two drives have to always exist on the other controller taking up ada0 and ada1:
23:52:33 <rtyler> https://gist.github.com/rtyler/93216e28c33b897fdf48d931f59eb140
23:52:34 <VimDiesel> Title: zpool status · GitHub
23:55:28 <tmp_> Okay, that's inline with what I thought. I made a similar setup work by switching the members to diskid/DISK-<ident>p<#>
23:56:00 <rtprio> oh, that's a good idea
23:56:13 <tmp_> I got the idents by running: geom disk list | grep -E '(Name|ident): '
23:58:26 <rtyler> what command were you using to adjust the pool? did you just detach them and then reattach with their disk ID?
23:58:43 <rtprio> and you should be able to zpool replace the drives one at a time
23:58:44 <tmp_> I don't know how to change that in place, so (with raidz1) I removed the spare, then re-added it using the diskid/DISK notation.
23:59:27 <tmp_> s/spare/sparable one/
23:59:50 <tmp_> Resilver, then repeat the process.