From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Apr 5 07:50:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA13564 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 5 Apr 1997 07:50:53 -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 HAA13559 for ; Sat, 5 Apr 1997 07:50:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA18656; Sat, 5 Apr 1997 10:54:33 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970405104824.00a54100@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 10:48:26 -0500 To: Terry Lambert From: dennis Subject: Re: 2.2.1R NFS and FTP load problem FOUND Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, 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 09:24 PM 4/4/97 -0700, Terry Lambert 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. > >More likely, your RAM is flakey, and you are simply changing the >usage pattern such that the flakey RAM is no longer critical path. > >Any chance of you playing a game of "shuffle the SIMMs" to verify >this? As I said, 2 different machines were involved, so the likelihood of it being flakey ram is rather unlikely. Plus the same ram was used when it works (just added another bank)..... Dennis > > > Regards, > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org >--- >Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present >or previous employers. > >