From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 20 18:26:07 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C9F16A4DE for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:26:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4412943D45 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:26:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (rwvmzs@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k6KIPx9n003551 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:26:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id k6KIPxZ4003550; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:25:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <200607201825.k6KIPxZ4003550@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20060720190823.M98132@fledge.watson.org> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-current User-Agent: tin/1.8.0-20051224 ("Ronay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:26:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 19:50:28 +0000 Cc: Subject: Re: vmstat's entries type X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:26:07 -0000 Robert Watson wrote: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > > > and easily triples the amount of storage for each of them... > > > > True, storage is tripled. But how many counters are we talking about here? > > I guess rather a few, not thousands of them, right? > > > > > It is ugly :-( > > > > Yes, I certainly agree, it's ugly. But having wrong output from "vmstat -s" > > and other tools is ugly, too -- and it is noticed by a lot more people. > > This problem is not limited to vmstat -- the network stack uses 32-bit > counters in a lot of places where 32-bits has become very small. I see. That's unfortunate. :-( However, byte counters and packet counters in IPFW and IPF (and probably PF, but I haven't verified) are already 64bit. So there _are_ at least a few places where the problem does not exist. # ipfw show 65535 26326861627 25395554002225 allow ip from any to any # uname -m i386 Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "[...] one observation we can make here is that Python makes an excellent pseudocoding language, with the wonderful attribute that it can actually be executed." -- Bruce Eckel