From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec 31  9:19:41 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 695FC14DCC
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:19:39 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com)
Received: (from dillon@localhost)
	by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id JAA83856;
	Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:19:37 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon)
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 09:19:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <199912311719.JAA83856@apollo.backplane.com>
To: Keith Stevenson <k.stevenson@louisville.edu>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: softupdates and debug.max_softdeps
References: <tom@uniserve.com> <19991231004902.01D721CA0@overcee.netplex.com.au> <19991231112421.A27070@osaka.louisville.edu>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

    It seems that all the reported problems so far are on -stable
    systems.  I wonder if the same problem occurs under -current?

    Also, all the reported problems so far are under 3.3 (for example,
    hub is running 3.3-RC in a Sep 12 build).  How about 3.4?

    It may be possible to mitigate the problem under 3.x systems by reducing
    vfs.lodirtybuffers and vfs.hidirtybuffers, and under 4.x systems by
    reducing vfs.hidirtybuffers (lodirtybuffers does not exist in 4.x).
    But I still don't know enough about the problem to be able to say anything
    authoritative.

					-Matt
					Matthew Dillon 
					<dillon@backplane.com>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message