Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:13:48 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: "Dag-Erling =?utf-8?q?Sm=C3=B8rgrav?=" <des@des.no> Cc: alc@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Time to bump default VM_SWZONE_SIZE_MAX? Message-ID: <201208241013.48805.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <866288laq0.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <502831B7.1080309@freebsd.org> <201208240748.19737.jhb@freebsd.org> <866288laq0.fsf@ds4.des.no>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Friday, August 24, 2012 8:45:43 am Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> writes: > > Note that on i386 you can't get more than 4GB of RAM without PAE, and if you > > have any modern x86 box with > 4GB of RAM, you are most likely running amd64 > > on it, not i386. I think i386 would be fine to just keep the limit it had. > > The limit we had was insufficient for 8 GB of swap. In absolute or practical terms? Not all swap blocks are fully utilized. At Y! the install script we used would compute the maximum theoretical swap zone needed and then cut it in half, and this worked quite well. Also, keep in mind, this is for i386, not amd64. At this point i386 is going to be used on smaller systems (e.g. netbooks, etc.), not servers that have lots of swap. -- John Baldwinhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201208241013.48805.jhb>