From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Oct 20 16:35:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA28677 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:35:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA28670 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:35:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA15924; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:34:42 -0700 (PDT) To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Urge to apply the vn device hack even to 2.2.5 In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:36:21 +0200." <19971021003621.XE33370@uriah.heep.sax.de> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:34:42 -0700 Message-ID: <15920.877390482@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Perhaps it's indeed that you've got too much RAM. I remember Mr. KATO > telling something about a condition that the lockmgr panic happened > whenever something (from the vn object) was about to be paged in or > out. So my normal (-current) `make release' machine has 32 MB of RAM > (and X11 running by the same time), perhaps that condition is simply I was going to ask if RAM was a factor since I have 128MB in my release building box and don't hit a lot of low memory problems that others do as a result (and current.freebsd.org is another 128MB box - maybe we should make our release-a-day server a 486SX with 8MB of memory and switch it to being a release-a-week server instead. We'd not have as useful a service by far, but it sure would catch those load sensitive bugs early. :-) Jordan P.S. Yes, of course I'm just joking. :)