Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:59:33 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Stefan Lambrev <stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com> Cc: Eric Kjeldergaard <kjelderg@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: kernel panic with memory disks Message-ID: <20070822135932.GA9190@rot26.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <46CBDE05.2030007@moneybookers.com> References: <46C9B99C.1060403@moneybookers.com> <d9175cad0708201058o62e4441cq6c5a524791d65c4d@mail.gmail.com> <46CA951D.1060303@moneybookers.com> <20070821163729.GA91485@rot26.obsecurity.org> <46CBDE05.2030007@moneybookers.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 09:56:05AM +0300, Stefan Lambrev wrote: > >No, you should use -o swap. Where did it tell you to change the > >sysctls? > > > >Kris > > > Nowhere just guessing. OK, often not a good idea :) > I just needed one big file in the memory to ignore the slowness of hard > drives, to run few small benchmarks :) > I did this using tmpfs, but it act just like "-t swap" :) Yes, when you don't have enough RAM to do the thing you want. > Btw the confusion comes from the manual of mdconfig where it states: > > swap Swap space is used to back this memory disk. > > and I thought that type swap is always stored on the hard drives. > > and md(4) explains it a lot better: > > swap Backing store is allocated from buffer memory. Pages get pushed > out to the swap when the system is under memory pressure, > other- > wise they stay in the operating memory. Using swap backing is > generally preferable over malloc backing. OK, that could certainly be improved. Can you please submit a PR? Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070822135932.GA9190>