From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Apr  5 07:38:15 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA13092
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 5 Apr 1997 07:38:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA13083
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 5 Apr 1997 07:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA18581; Sat, 5 Apr 1997 10:42:53 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970405103644.00b0bbd0@etinc.com>
X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 10:36:52 -0500
To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
Subject: Re: 2.2.1R NFS and FTP load problem FOUND
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

At 03:37 AM 4/5/97 +0200, you wrote:
>> I then remembered that I had noticed that 2.2R was a bit clunky with
>>  8 meg of ram, so I popped in another 8 meg, and the problems
>> disappeared. So, it seems, ftp and nfs loads cant be done on at
>> 8 meg system.
>
>the curios thing is that I installed 2.2.1-R on a Pentium with 8MB
>using FTP and a PCI ne2000 clone. No problems there, I even rebuilt
>the kernel several times on that system. Are you sure your original
>8MB of RAM is ok ?

Did you load from a LOCAL FTP server, or over the net? I suspect that
a net load would be a LOT slower and thus have different load
requirements int terms of buffers and memory.

I didnt remove the orig 8 mb...I just added 8 more. Plus, this occurred
on 2 different machines....with clearly different ram modules. I've also
been using these machines before, so its nothing new.

Dennis
>
>	Luigi
>
>