From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Mar 13 7:42:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E8AF37B416; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:42:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g2DFghWZ169340; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:42:43 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20020313093805.GA29679@genius.tao.org.uk> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:42:41 -0500 To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Josef Karthauser From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: dumpsys() rewrite Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG, peter@FreeBSD.ORG, jake@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.3 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 11:16 AM +0100 3/13/02, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: >Josef Karthauser writes: > > It would be fantastic to be able to compress the memory image > > as it is dumped to disk. That would speed it up a bit in most > > cases. If each dump_write reads memory directly rather than > > going through a common function this is never going to be easy > > to do. > >dumpsys() controls what is written and when. It is perfectly >conceivable for dumpsys() to do the same kind of hole compression >that savecore(1) does, but it would be *much* slower and ... Would it make any sense to compress it in the 'gzip' sense of the word (or some simpler algorithm)? Or does it already do some of that? -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message