From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 7 13:43:17 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 000D337B401 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:43:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (12-233-57-224.client.attbi.com [12.233.57.224]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06A7843F85 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:43:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h27Lh7LT064011; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:43:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id h27Lh6n0064010; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:43:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:43:06 -0800 From: David Schultz To: "Marc G. Fournier" Cc: Wes Peters , Vallo Kallaste , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "leak" in softupdates? Message-ID: <20030307214306.GB63881@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: "Marc G. Fournier" , Wes Peters , Vallo Kallaste , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20030305204526.T38115@hub.org> <20030307101718.GA1908@kevad.internal> <20030307081643.B15693@hub.org> <200303070648.26984.wes@softweyr.com> <20030307152045.P18433@hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030307152045.P18433@hub.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Thus spake Marc G. Fournier : > > Being worked on. Not so hard to do, much harder to do right. Guess who > > took the easy sleazy path? ;^) The other good news is that the intel > > network cards, both 10/100 (fxp) and 10/100/1000 (em) support 64-bit > > addressing, even in 32-bit PCI slots, so you'll have at least ONE enet > > interface that'll work reasonably fast. > > Yes, I don't recall who it was that explained it to me (Terry, maybe?), > but I understand the problem with going above 4gig under ia32, and was > personally just sitting back and waiting for Intel to go full steam ahead > on the ia64 stuff ... but they just sacked it :( Man, did that ever throw > a shiver up my back ... It's amazing how many times bank switching has been reinvented, eh? FreeBSD now runs on sparc64, you know, and that's an architecture that's designed for Really Big Machines. Sun has 128-processor machines with 512 GB of RAM running Solaris. Just think about it: all of your problems about address space size and KVA_PAGES conveniently vanish for the low, low price of 10 million dollars. ;-) Granted, the FreeBSD port may take some time to mature, and you'd be journeying once again into uncharted territory if you tried it on a machine that big. There is also x86-64 around the corner, which is not aesthetically pleasing in that it's just another hack on top of the idiosyncratic 8086, but AMD seems to have tried to address most of the fundamental problems with x86, such as the shortage of general-purpose registers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message