From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 19 11:16:45 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA02937 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 11:16:45 -0700 Received: from ki1.chemie.fu-berlin.de (ki1.Chemie.FU-Berlin.DE [160.45.24.21]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA02925 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 11:16:30 -0700 Received: by ki1.chemie.fu-berlin.de (Smail3.1.28.1) from sirius.physik.fu-berlin.de (130.133.3.140) with smtp id ; Mon, 19 Jun 95 20:16 MEST Received: by sirius.physik.fu-berlin.de; id AA04427; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 20:16:09 +0200 From: Thomas Graichen Message-Id: <9506191816.AA04427@sirius.physik.fu-berlin.de> Subject: freebsd and memory To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 20:16:09 +0200 (MET DST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2261 Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk hello again i some months before asked some questions about freebsd's memory handling and shared libs etc. in the news - and now again some questions and (evtl. ideas) (i hope that i'm not boring you) * is FreeBSD using demand paging for it's shared libs - i don't think (i can overwrite the libs while they are used - and this is'nt working under Linux for instance which seems to use demand paging for shared libs) - if not (and that's what i think) - is anybody working on that - or can tell me why it will not go (if not) - i think it would be a good option for small-in-memory systems - because this way they don't have to do so much with their vm system (pagein/out) - i say this because i'm still looking for the difference between Linux and FreeBSD at this point - Linux produces binaries of nearly exactly the same size - but - at a nearly exact system it starts much later swapping than FreeBSD - and thus is a bit faster than it (for smaller systems) - because it can take a bigger win of it's merged vm/buffer cache (better - advantage from the cache part) - i mean - at a 16mb linux system there are normally around 3m for disk buffers - but at a nearly exact same FreeBSD machine (same config - same hardware) - the system is heavyly swapping (sorry - paging) and there's nearly no memory used for buffering - that's why linux looks better --> can anybody please explain me the difference - why is this so (and it is so - i know it from my own experience) * can anybody please explain me how exactly the memory management, swapping, paging, shared libs, demand paging is working at FreeBSD - i know a bit in general about it but i'd like to understand how FreeBSD is doing it and which tricks it is using thanks in advance - t _______________________________________________________||_____________________ __|| Perfection is reached, not when there is no __|| thomas graichen longer anything to add, but when there __|| freie universitaet berlin is no longer anything to take away __|| fachbereich physik __|| - Antoine de Saint-Exupery - __|| ___________________________||____email: graichen@omega.physik.fu-berlin.de____