On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:

> "Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > No, there's no stats collected on this stuff, because it's a pretty
> > > obvious and straight-forward thing: you have to have a KVA space large
> > > enough that, once you subtract out 4K for each 4M of physical memory and
> > > swap (max 4G total for both), you end up with memory left over for the
> > > kernel to use, and your limits are such that the you don't run out of
> > > PTEs before you run out of mbufs (or whatever you plan on allocating).
> >
> > God, I'm glad its straightforwards :)
> >
> > Okay, first off, you say "(max 4G total for both)" ... do you max *total*
> > between the two, or phy can be 4g *plus* swap can be 4g for a total of 8g?
> You aren't going to be able to exceed 4G, no matter what you do,
> because that's the limit of your address space.
> If you want more, then you need to use a 64 bit processor (or use a
> processor that supports bank selection, and hack up FreeBSD to do
> bank swapping on 2G at a time, just like Linux has been hacked up,
> and expect that it won't be very useful).

Now I'm confused ... from what I've read so far, going out and buying an
IBM eSeries 350 with 16Gig of RAM with Dual-PIII processors and hoping to
run FreeBSD on it is not possible?  Or, rather, hoping to use more then
4 out of 16Gig of RAM is?

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to