Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 17:08:27 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> Cc: Conrad Meyer <cem@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r326758 - in head/sys/i386: conf include Message-ID: <20171211150827.GJ2272@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <5A2E6608.5090205@grosbein.net> References: <201712110432.vBB4WbnE021090@repo.freebsd.org> <20171211091943.GF2272@kib.kiev.ua> <5A2E5D44.9030904@grosbein.net> <20171211105242.GH2272@kib.kiev.ua> <5A2E6608.5090205@grosbein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 06:03:36PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > I do not try to contradict other usage patterns. In fact, I'm eager to know > a practical example of such pattern: a task, an application, anything real? Plain workstation use, like X11+browser+editor+some other programs easily allocates 1000+ threads. It was still possible to use 32bit x86 for that, of course in max memory config without PAE, and without ZFS. Add some load that involves network, for instance torrent client, to establish the pressure on KVA. I am almost sure that users would get troubles now. > > I already know how to bring FreeBSD down to its kneels using stress tests > but that's not what I'm looking for in this case of kstack_pages. > Stress test is useful due to its canary nature.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20171211150827.GJ2272>