From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 6 17:21:07 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB3816A41A for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 17:21:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9F413C468 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 17:21:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBZBJ-00013z-TC for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:21:05 +0000 Received: from 89-172-37-126.adsl.net.t-com.hr ([89.172.37.126]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:21:05 +0000 Received: from ivoras by 89-172-37-126.adsl.net.t-com.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:21:05 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:20:52 +0100 Lines: 50 Message-ID: References: <20080104163352.GA42835@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <9bbcef730801040958t36e48c9fjd0fbfabd49b08b97@mail.gmail.com> <200801061051.26817.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> <9bbcef730801060458k4bc9f2d6uc3f097d70e087b68@mail.gmail.com> <4780D289.7020509@FreeBSD.org> <4780E546.9050303@FreeBSD.org> <9bbcef730801060651y489f1f9bw269d0968407dd8fb@mail.gmail.com> <4780EF09.4090908@FreeBSD.org> <47810BE3.4080601@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigBF0E8DBB5E5B643C0C0784B4" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 89-172-37-126.adsl.net.t-com.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) In-Reply-To: <47810BE3.4080601@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Sender: news Subject: Re: When will ZFS become stable? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:21:07 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigBF0E8DBB5E5B643C0C0784B4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Kris Kennaway wrote: > > Better yet, why not >> increase both vm.kmem_size and KVA_PAGES to (the equivalent of) 640 MB= =20 >> or 768 MB by default for 7.0? >=20 > That is answered in the tuning guide. Tuning KVA_PAGES by default is=20 > not appropriate. Ok. I'd like to understand what is the relationship between KVA_PAGES=20 and vm.kmem_size. The tuning guide says: """By default the kernel receives 1GB of the 4GB of address space=20 available on the i386 architecture, and this is used for all of the=20 kernel address space needs, not just the kmem map. By increasing=20 KVA_PAGES you can allocate a larger proportion of the 4GB address=20 space...""" and: """recompile your kernel with increased KVA_PAGES option, to increase=20 the size of the kernel address space, before vm.kmem_size can be=20 increased beyond 512M""" What is the other 512 MB of the 1 GB used for? --------------enigBF0E8DBB5E5B643C0C0784B4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHgQ36ldnAQVacBcgRArjoAJ4+6LvxL9bOjNOIHLiCA5rs2o99hACfZlBl mQUKsJ1MR9ZyUXbn5EoYyKE= =d0JH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigBF0E8DBB5E5B643C0C0784B4--