From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Feb 28 20:20:37 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA21565
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 20:20:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from jmb@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA21544
          Wed, 28 Feb 1996 20:20:28 -0800 (PST)
From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb>
Message-Id: <199602290420.UAA21544@freefall.freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Latest 2.1R panic. Hmm.
To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 20:20:26 -0800 (PST)
Cc: gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199602290412.UAA08136@Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Feb 28, 96 08:12:56 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

David Greenman wrote:
>    Yes, we can make just about anything a compile-time option and yes, the
> size of the message buffer should be tuneable. BUT, that's not my point. If
> it is generally considered that 8K is what is needed, then we should increase
> the size irrespective of whether or not it is tuneable.

	please increse the size to 8k.  dmesg | wc -c shows 2814
	immediately after boot.  it will only increase and people
	get more "stuff" attached to their systems.  and my system
	is small.