Two additional pieces of information.
The original limitation was more related to DEV_BSIZE calculations for
the buf/bio, which is now 64-bits and thus not applicable, though you
probably need some preemptive casts to ensure the multiplication is
done in 64-bits. There was
On 08/22/2011 21:36, Matthew Dillon wrote:
The limitation was ONLY due to a *minor* 32-bit integer overflow in one
or two *intermediate* calculations in the radix tree code, which I
long ago fixed in DragonFly.
Just find the changes in the DFly codebase and determine if they
On 2011-Aug-18 12:16:44 +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov melif...@ipfw.ru
wrote:
The code should look like this:
...
(move pages recalculation before b-list check)
I notice a very similar patch has been applied to -current as r225076.
For the archives, I've done some testing with this patch on a
The limitation was ONLY due to a *minor* 32-bit integer overflow in one
or two *intermediate* calculations in the radix tree code, which I
long ago fixed in DragonFly.
Just find the changes in the DFly codebase and determine if they need
to be applied.
The swap space
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:33:29PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov
melif...@ipfw.ruwrote:
On 10.08.2011 19:16, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Chuck Swigercswi...@mac.com wrote:
On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov melif...@ipfw.ruwrote:
On 10.08.2011 19:16, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Chuck Swigercswi...@mac.com wrote:
On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am trying to set up 64GB partitions for swap for a system that
has 64GB
On 08/20/2011 12:41, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:33:29PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Alexander V. Chernikovmelif...@ipfw.ruwrote:
On 10.08.2011 19:16, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Chuck Swigercswi...@mac.com wrote:
On Aug 9, 2011, at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/20/2011 12:41, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:33:29PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Alexander V.
Chernikovmelif...@ipfw.ruwrote:
On 10.08.2011 19:16, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 10:42:28PM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/20/2011 12:41, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:33:29PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Alexander V.
On 10.08.2011 19:16, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Chuck Swigercswi...@mac.com wrote:
On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am trying to set up 64GB partitions for swap for a system that
has 64GB of RAM (with the idea to dump kernel core etc). But, on
8-stable as of today I get:
On 09.08.11 18:16, David Wolfskill wrote:
While FreeBSD cannot address more than 32GB per swap space, it permits
as many as 32 swap spaces to be active concurrently.
I am more concerned that with 32GB of swap in single device I could not
dump kernel core, with 64GB of RAM.
Daniel
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:13:14AM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
On 09.08.11 18:16, David Wolfskill wrote:
While FreeBSD cannot address more than 32GB per swap space, it
permits as many as 32 swap spaces to be active concurrently.
I am more concerned that with 32GB of swap in single device I
On 10.08.11 10:47, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:13:14AM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am more concerned that with 32GB of swap in single device I could
not dump kernel core, with 64GB of RAM.
My apologies if I've misunderstood something, but why does this of any
concern?
Chuck Swiger cswi...@mac.com wrote:
On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am trying to set up 64GB partitions for swap for a system that
has 64GB of RAM (with the idea to dump kernel core etc). But, on
8-stable as of today I get:
WARNING: reducing size to maximum of
Am 10.08.2011 um 10:09 schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
On 10.08.11 10:47, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:13:14AM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am more concerned that with 32GB of swap in single device I could not
dump kernel core, with 64GB of RAM.
My apologies if I've
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:27:27AM +, Holger Kipp wrote:
Am 10.08.2011 um 10:09 schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
On 10.08.11 10:47, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:13:14AM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am more concerned that with 32GB of swap in single device I could not
Am 10.08.2011 um 10:47 schrieb Jeremy Chadwick:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:27:27AM +, Holger Kipp wrote:
Am 10.08.2011 um 10:09 schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
On 10.08.11 10:47, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:13:14AM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am more concerned that
Hi Daniel,
Just a stupid question, as I have done something different. Can't you use a
different device or slice for the dump? In that case there is no limitation
on the size of the dump device, as far as I know.
My setup: 96GB, dump device local 160G disc, slice for swap, slice for
dump,
On 10.08.11 11:47, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
So we're back to where we started: swap slices/partitions can be
greater than 32GBytes in size, but something is limiting the maximum
amount of memory which can be dumped to a single swap swap to 32GBytes.
It seems there is still some confusion.
10.08.2011 17:42, Daniel Kalchev writes:
I believe the gmirror bug might exist in smaller partitions as well, but
haven't tested it yet (have few such systems that never duped core). It
does not matter if I do full dump or minidump: on gmirrored 64GB
partittion savecore does not find
On 10.08.11 14:19, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
You should read gmirror(8) manual page about Doing kernel dumps to
gmirror providers.
Thanks, I totally forgot about the gmirror limitations.
When using the default minidump, the result is:
savecore: first and last dump headers disagree on
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:42:11PM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
On 10.08.11 11:47, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
So we're back to where we started: swap slices/partitions can be
greater than 32GBytes in size, but something is limiting the
maximum amount of memory which can be dumped to a single
I am trying to set up 64GB partitions for swap for a system that has
64GB of RAM (with the idea to dump kernel core etc). But, on 8-stable as
of today I get:
WARNING: reducing size to maximum of 67108864 blocks per swap unit
Is there workaround for this limitation?
Daniel
On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am trying to set up 64GB partitions for swap for a system that has 64GB of
RAM (with the idea to dump kernel core etc). But, on 8-stable as of today I
get:
WARNING: reducing size to maximum of 67108864 blocks per swap unit
Is there
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:26:46PM +0300, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
I am trying to set up 64GB partitions for swap for a system that has
64GB of RAM (with the idea to dump kernel core etc). But, on 8-stable as
of today I get:
WARNING: reducing size to maximum of 67108864 blocks per swap unit
25 matches
Mail list logo
