From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Oct 31 13:43:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA07124 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 13:43:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA07111 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 13:43:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) id QAA25551; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 16:43:07 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" Message-Id: <199710312143.QAA25551@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: Memory VS. Performance under FreeBSD In-Reply-To: from "Jamil J. Weatherbee" at "Oct 30, 97 08:08:41 pm" To: jamil@trojanhorse.ml.org (Jamil J. Weatherbee) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 16:43:07 -0500 (EST) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jamil J. Weatherbee said: > > Does anybody have any statistics on memory vs. performance as you go to > large memory configurations (>64MB), also what is the biggest RAM > configuration possible on a FreeBSD machine? > > Kind of something like: > > > RAM for x USERS for x MEAN PROCESSES vs x DISK ACCESS > Can't answer that specific question. However, there is kind of a design "idea" that it should work with 3GB of RAM. That would require significant kernel tuning, because few of us have any experience with machines that large. We have avoided or fixed terrible algorithms like O(n^2,3,4) stuff. We still have stuff that can be improved, but we are making continual progress. -- John dyson@freebsd.org jdyson@nc.com