From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 22 08:01:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F5F216A4CE for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TRANG.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A0343D5E for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:01:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by TRANG.nuxi.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3MF1Lju090457; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:01:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i3MF1KJG090454; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:01:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:01:20 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Eric Anderson Message-ID: <20040422150120.GB78422@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <40867A5D.9010600@centtech.com> <20040421152233.GA23501@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <40868F08.20301@centtech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40868F08.20301@centtech.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Directories with 2million files X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 15:01:32 -0000 On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:11:04AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > Doing 'ls -f' works, but still manages to munch up about 260MB of ram, > which runs since I have enough, but otherwise would not. It used 260MB of VM, not physial RAM. Even with less in your machine, it would have worked fine -- no one is going to have less than than much virutal memory (i.e., swap) if they run Netscape on the same machine. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)