From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 27 20:22:56 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC77610656A0 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:22:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from mail.potentialtech.com (internet.potentialtech.com [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC29B8FC24 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:22:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from vanquish.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (pr40.pitbpa0.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE764EBC09; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:22:54 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: "Simon Chang" Message-Id: <20081027162254.39a47d1f.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <8efc42630810271314n3d2c97e6w14f682af14437cfc@mail.gmail.com> References: <49060AE0.3000301@optiksecurite.com> <8efc42630810271157u2202e7f7xfb89a7004d072ae9@mail.gmail.com> <4906196C.8000407@optiksecurite.com> <20081027160522.bd32e714.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <8efc42630810271314n3d2c97e6w14f682af14437cfc@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: collecting pv entries -- suggest increasing PMAP_SHPGPERPROC X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:22:57 -0000 In response to "Simon Chang" : > > By the way, does anyone know whether there is any way to tune > PMAP_SHPGPERPROC using sysctl, or does such button/knob not exist? No. I've had this discussion with the developer who originally wrote that code. The table size is too deep inside the kernel to adjust it at run time. The kernel needs to know what it is when it boots, and it can't change after. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com