Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:48:09 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, "Jan B. Koum " <jkb@best.com>, David Greenman <dg@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD/OS compatibility (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf .. Message-ID: <199903120148.RAA71979@apollo.backplane.com> References: <19990311152448.A19522@best.com> <5303.921195837@zippy.cdrom.com> <19990312103615.J490@lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
A year ago we didn't have to worry too much about people sticking a
gig of memory into a machine, but that was a year ago.
The cost of a 256MB machine a year ago is roughly equivalent to the cost
of a 512MB to 1GB machine now, and it takes that much memory to truely
utilize the cheap computing power now available.
Today, 512MB configurations are commonplace and this is right on the
edge of what FreeBSD's KVM configuration could scale to until DG's
commit. 1GB+ machines are showing up with increasing frequency.
These configurations are only going to get larger as time continues to
flow.
I didn't realize that we already didn't have modern BSDI compatibility
or I would have pushed for the KVM increase earlier. If all we are losing
is legacy BSDI support, then that is all the more reason to bump up the
kernel's KVM capability now. 1GB should be sufficient to handle an IA32
box containing 4GB of memory. I think it is well worth the hassle to
fix this now.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903120148.RAA71979>