Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 07:45:49 +0200 (SAST) From: Irvine Short <irvine@sanbi.ac.za> To: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large memory issues on 4-STABLE Message-ID: <20030915074348.R36360@fling.sanbi.ac.za> In-Reply-To: <20030914221953.H97248@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: <20030913092804.S46465@fling.sanbi.ac.za> <20030913123257.C51554@fling.sanbi.ac.za> <20030915070012.U36360@fling.sanbi.ac.za> <20030914221953.H97248@carver.gumbysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003, Doug White wrote: > > However we have a situation where if I set MAXDSIZ to 2048 or above then > > things break, so FreeBSD right now has an effectivce limit of 2GB per > > process. > > > > Is this to be considered a bug or a feature? > > I'd have to say feature. The kernel placement and user/kernel boundary > sizing is part of FreeBSD and the 4GB limit for both kernel and user is a > restriction of the processor architecture. Thanks for the definitive reply! > > This is relevant to the work we're doing - some of my users actually > > really do need this amount of memory. > > If this is the case then you should consider a 64 bit architecture, like > ia64, sparc64, or amd64 (Opteron). Aah, but at the mo the 32bit systems are way way cheaper... -- Irvine Short Sys Admin SANBI, University of the Western Cape, South Africa http://www.sanbi.ac.za tel: +27-21-959 3645 cel: +27-82-494 3828
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030915074348.R36360>