Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 09:26:48 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: "Mikhail A. Sokolov" <mishania@demos.net> Cc: Geoff Buckingham <geoffb@demon.net>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: repeated 3.1-s panics. Message-ID: <3713E0C8.FA7F7AF9@newsguy.com> References: <19990413183015.A1791@demos.su> <19990413155824.M3680@gti.noc.demon.net> <19990413190358.A3408@demos.su> <37137C48.397D9600@newsguy.com> <19990414012541.B13704@demos.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Mikhail A. Sokolov" wrote: > > what and since when is not supported under -stable? 256MB+256Maxusers+noSMP or > 512MB+256Maxusers+SMP? Btw, there're mbuf leaks, not clusters, but mbuf leaks > in 3.1-S (probably, nfsd eats it?) Large memory configurations with large maxusers. I don't know the exact relation between these two numbers, but maxusers>128 and 512 Mb of RAM is definetely out. It doesn't crash right away, but it eventually panics. I think same is true for 256 Mb RAM and maxusers 256. Since when? Since ever. This has been fixed in -current recently (causing a temporary break of compatibility with BSD/OS binaries), and will eventually be brought into -stable. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "nothing better than the ability to perform cunning linguistics" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3713E0C8.FA7F7AF9>