On 3/30/11 7:23 PM, Scott McEachern wrote:
On 03/30/11 19:18, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Amit Kulkarni<[email protected]> [2011-03-31 01:09]:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Henning
Brauer<[email protected]> wrote:
* Amit Kulkarni<[email protected]> [2011-03-31 00:45]:
Nothing directly, just observing a comparison of default choice.
OpenBSD opts for one strategy (bufcache = 10%) and Opensolaris opts
for another (bufcache close to 100%).
you are wrong.
where? please educate me.
your guess on the reasoning for the default is oh so wrong.
nuff said. have a beer or 13, relax and wait.
(and your 13 gonna be cheaper than one bjor here)
Gonna chime in that I'm quite curious as well. Anyone else care to
explain why? My assumptions for why OpenBSD's bufcache percent being
"low" are probably quite wrong.
And what are we readers to wait for, anyway?
OK,
I may be way off track and totally wrong here, but isn't that worked Bob
did may be two hacketon ago and the bufcache isn't limited to 10%
anymore, but goes all the way to 90%.
My memory may be failing me big time, but I clearly remember him acting
up a lots on the buffer cache in OpenBSD and there was actually very
funny comments at that hacketon including some developers saying the
eared like girls high pitch scream or something. (;>
May be was the wrong work, but I clearly remember that being Bob
screaming as well based on the feedback.
Way to lazy to find reference to in on undeadly, but I believe that's
possibly what Henning is suggesting to you.
Again unless I am way off and that's really possible, OpenBSD do not use
only 10% buffer cache for some time now and thanks to Bob for that!
But again, may be I put my foot in my mouth once more. (;>
Best,
Daniel
