From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 22 00:59:44 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 801BEDE; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 00:59:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wjw@digiware.nl) Received: from mail.digiware.nl (smtp.digiware.nl [31.223.170.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A5258FC08; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 00:59:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rack1.digiware.nl (localhost.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) by mail.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B0A15343E; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 01:59:41 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digiware.nl Received: from mail.digiware.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by rack1.digiware.nl (rack1.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iIki4xqVH-As; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 01:59:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.10.67] (opteron [192.168.10.67]) by mail.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2113C15343B; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 01:59:41 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <50AD78F8.9000006@digiware.nl> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 01:59:36 +0100 From: Willem Jan Withagen Organization: Digiware Management b.v. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Chadd Subject: Re: Increasing the DMESG buffer.... References: <50ACA59D.3080809@digiware.nl> <20121121101411.GG4535@server.rulingia.com> <50ACD522.7000706@digiware.nl> <50ACEE5B.8000901@FreeBSD.org> <50ACF891.4050105@digiware.nl> <1353513692.69940.7.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <50ACFC6C.8070506@FreeBSD.org> <20121122040251.G21191@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <50AD0E82.3070706@digiware.nl> <20121121194142.8c4bf7d1977f13801a021ccc@getmail.no> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Ronald Klop X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 00:59:44 -0000 On 2012-11-21 21:08, Adrian Chadd wrote: > .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and > controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly > go wrong.' > > Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it > hard-coded like that. Us embedded people can drop that down to > something smaller. > > There. Problem solved, right? My first ever self build system was a Z80 which started at 2Kbyte EPROM and 2K RAM. which was huge at that time. (1980's) Later I made bankswitch to have some 32K ROM and 2* 32K RAM. Boy was that a lot of space. The first ever FreeBSD I/we ran, was 1.0(.2??) on a lowly i486 with 16Mb of memory, with a 16 port serialcard with 14k4 modems. It ran Bnews with a full feed on 2 1.6Gb disks... Was mail server for > 1000 customers. It ran slip for IP access... So sure I understand where we are coming from. And I'm still tinkering in removing bloat that I will not ever use, even though my home server has 35T of storage. :) But hen still I agree with Ronald that we need to cater for the mass, which means we keep in mind what just about most everybody is running. And that is certainly not embedded with 16Mb NOR and 32Mb RAM. But then again I do appreciate you setting me straight on that waste is never a good thing. --WjW