Re: Time to bump default VM_SWZONE_SIZE_MAX?

On Friday, August 24, 2012 5:44:48 am Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav wrote:
> John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> writes:
> > Hmm, this is not true on i386 where the problem is not just the physical
> > RAM required, but also address space.  (The swap zone is all mapped int=
o KVA=20
> > even if it isn't used.)  This is why Alan's e-mail specifically
> > mentioned amd64, ia64, etc. but not i386 in his list.  I think i386 sti=
ll
> > needs this limit, and I think your commit jumped the gun a bit.
>=20
> How about we reinstate the limit on i386, but increase it to 64 MB?
> That would increase the theoretical maximum to ~15 GB.  People with 8 GB
> swap would get a warning, but would be unlikely to run into trouble.
>=20
> (or we could increase the limit to 72351744 bytes, which is the precise
> amount required to support 16 GB)

Note that on i386 you can't get more than 4GB of RAM without PAE, and if you
have any modern x86 box with > 4GB of RAM, you are most likely running amd64
on it, not i386.  I think i386 would be fine to just keep the limit it had.

=2D-=20
John Baldwin
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"