Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 20:42:44 -0400 From: Brandon Allbery <allbery.b@gmail.com> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net>, Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Jason Unovitch <jason.unovitch@gmail.com>, herbert@oslo.ath.cx Subject: Re: 10.2-Beta i386..what's wrong..? Message-ID: <CAKFCL4VVtLspj%2BRQxSHjyQxAhixPuMiQoehoA2MYWeSgqTTwAQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20150724004026.GA1370@lonesome.com> References: <55B17B7A.4080402@gmail.com> <20150723234805.GK84931@FreeBSD.org> <55B18488.9060602@sorbs.net> <20150724004026.GA1370@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> wrote: > zfs is a resource hog. i386 is not able to handle the demand as well > as amd64. > Even amd64 is no guarantee. I installed one of the Illumos spinoffs on a 2GB amd64 netbook (they mostly force zfs). I think it lasted 2 days before the kernel panics started. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKFCL4VVtLspj%2BRQxSHjyQxAhixPuMiQoehoA2MYWeSgqTTwAQ>