On 17/10/2013 17:01, RW wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 16:27:49 +0100
Frank Leonhardt wrote:
On 17/10/2013 15:04, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
I'm using a 72gb swap disk.
I've 10gb RAM
I get this warning:
warning: total configured swap (8960911 pages) exceeds maximum
recommended amount (8243200
After the last major update of www/firefox to version 23 firefox
rejects of moving/swapping the tabs. They are static now. I do not
know whether this has to do with the great pixman update, because
coincidentally I made bot the pixman update and the update of firefox
towards revision 23 slipped
El día Monday, October 14, 2013 a las 08:54:56AM +0200, O. Hartmann escribió:
After the last major update of www/firefox to version 23 firefox
rejects of moving/swapping the tabs. They are static now. I do not
know whether this has to do with the great pixman update, because
coincidentally
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 09:50:48 +0200
Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de wrote:
El día Monday, October 14, 2013 a las 08:54:56AM +0200, O. Hartmann
escribió:
After the last major update of www/firefox to version 23 firefox
rejects of moving/swapping the tabs. They are static now. I do not
El día Monday, October 14, 2013 a las 10:23:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann escribió:
I have a 10-CURRENT r255948 from October 1st, with all ports from head
too, rev. r328930.
FF is version 24.0 in the r328930 ports and the tabs can be moved fine
with drag and drop.
HIH
matthias
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013, O. Hartmann wrote:
FF is in my case 24, too:
pkg info firefox
firefox-24.0,1
Have you done updating the ports regarding
20130929
in /usr/ports/UPDATING? I did on all boxes and on all boxes I did the
tab-stickyness is present.
Firefox 24 allows tab moves for me on both
Hi,
We've got a number of 9.x machines - just setup a new 9.1-RELEASE-p4 amd64
system, put net-snmp on it (net-snmp-5.7.2_3) - and we're getting 'weird'
results for some stats, e.g.
UCD-SNMP-MIB::ssSysInterrupts.0 = INTEGER: 1145324516 interrupts/s
UCD-SNMP-MIB::ssSwapIn.0 = INTEGER:
On Wed, 29 May 2013 19:52:02 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com writes:
BTW you mean paging, or swap use, rather that swapping. Linux
supports only paging, so it can be taken as read that swapping
means paging, but FreeBSD supports both.
Yes, there is some
with paging.
But its history is as follows (per Wikipedia):
This is a bit Linux-centric.
...
You page-out pages and swap-out processes.
When FreeBSD is very short of memory it swaps-out entire processes to
concentrate the memory in the running processes. Linux goes directly
from
RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com writes:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
common example is
On Sun, 26 May 2013 18:48:18 -0500
Adam Vande More wrote:
Um, that is wrong. It is in fact the basically the point of TRIM.
And SSD's typically use the best form of wear leveling and it's
usually advisable to leave a bit of the drive unpartitioned/unused to
ensure the wear leveling works
overhead cost in small problem sizes
relative to cache.
http://erikdemaine.org/papers/BRICS2002/paper.pdf
In light of available but not implemented better VMM algos, perhaps *BSD and
Linux could eliminate or reduce the need for:
- swap space
- swapping out RAM even if there is no lack
and cache-dependent. Still,
I will check the paper out :) thanks.
In light of available but not implemented better VMM algos, perhaps *BSD
and
Linux could eliminate or reduce the need for:
- swap space
I run Archlinux without any swap space on a workstation laptop without
problems. I occasionally
sent to disk rather tying up physical memory indefinitely.
BTW you mean paging, or swap use, rather that swapping. Linux supports
only paging, so it can be taken as read that swapping means paging, but
FreeBSD supports both.
___
freebsd-questions
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:57:22 +0200
Fred Morcos wrote:
Linux has a sysctl variable vm.swappiness which you can set to 0 or 1
out of 100. Not sure how to achieve the same on FreeBSD, maybe one or
more combinations of the following?
You'll probably make things worse.
vm.stats.vm.v_swappgsout:
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:19 AM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
- overcommitment of memory (a bluff asking to be punished by OOM killer)
No self respecting Unix has an OOM by default.
- OOM killer
Are you suggesting FreeBSD does this crap?
Besides, they allow sloppy/dangerous programming.
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
Normal dynamic wear leveling on a modern SSD will be better than
imposing an FS- backed swap for 4GB partion occupying a small fraction
of total drive space.
Quite so.
- M
On Wed, 29 May 2013, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
Normal dynamic wear leveling on a modern SSD will be better than
imposing an FS- backed swap for 4GB partion occupying a small fraction
of total drive space.
And you
of benefits. TRIM-less swap in this
case doesn't. The PE rate of the worst MLC SSD's at this point is
@3000 AFAIK. Given those figures and average desktop swap rate at my
estimation, prioritizing write endurance on an SSD is not
beneficial(especially with a SanForce). If you are swapping
continuously
blocks are no longer in use--is worthwhile?
As a whole, TRIM is worthwhile. However when an SSD is
overprovisioned it provides a lot of benefits. TRIM-less swap in this
case doesn't. The PE rate of the worst MLC SSD's at this point is
@3000 AFAIK. Given those figures and average desktop swap
is tmpfs. It's much better that files left on tmpfs can
sent to disk rather tying up physical memory indefinitely.
BTW you mean paging, or swap use, rather that swapping. Linux supports
only paging, so it can be taken as read that swapping means paging, but
FreeBSD supports both.
Yes
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, Linux utilizes swap space as part of virtual memory.
As does every other Unix.
--
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
is synonymous with paging.
You say that FB supports both, Linux supports paging only.
Well, Linux utilizes swap space as part of virtual memory.
So, can you elaborate more on that - what is the essence of the diff, why
should I avoid the term swapping when referring to Linux, assuming VMM
systems
Follow up comment.
It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking advantage
of system VMM and swap space.
Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so they
make the above (disk access model; cache-aware model) unnecessary
(obsolete
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:42 PM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
Follow up comment.
It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking
advantage
of system VMM and swap space.
Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so
they
make the above
On 26. mai 2013, at 10:58, M. V. bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com wrote:
But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap
partition for my server, and having swap partition could make my server
unstable
Any chance this could be a simple misunderstanding?
That he objected
jb jb.1234abcd at gmail.com writes:
M. V. bored_to_death85 at yahoo.com writes:
recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
swap partition for my server, and having swap partition could
make my server unstable.
I think your FB expert was up to something. I bet he spoke
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now. But
recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap partition for
my server, and having swap partition could
Hi,
On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
M. V. bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive.
it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a
long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I
On Sun, 26 May 2013 16:09:06 +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
M. V. bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive.
it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a
long
On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
M. V. bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com wrote:
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now.
But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert
on a SSD
drive. it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap)
for a long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert
that I shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable. this was so strange for me,
and I searched
On 26/05/2013 09:58, M. V. wrote:
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now.
But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap
partition for my
M. V. bored_to_death85 at yahoo.com writes:
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp,
/var , /usr and swap) for a long time now. But recently I heard from a
FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
swap partition
The Intel SLC mSATA drives I use in embedded devices don't support TRIM,
but - it doesn't seem to matter. Actually, I'm confident that just using
bare partitions for swap is fine, and I haven't had any of the trouble I
witnessed with MLC devices. The difference is that the size is limited
, /var , /usr and swap) for a
long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I
shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable. this was so strange for me,
and I searched a lot but couldn't find a reason for this claim.
because
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
Another problem with SSDs is that they can have difficulty with wear
leveling. This is even worse with swap because there is no way to use TRIM
to tell the SSD about blocks that have been freed.
Um, that is wrong
On Sun, 26 May 2013, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
Another problem with SSDs is that they can have difficulty with wear
leveling. This is even worse with swap because there is no way to use TRIM
to tell the SSD about blocks
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
Which part?
This part: Another problem with SSDs is that they can have
difficulty with wear leveling. Do as I suggested and you'll get
maximum life from the drive even with swap present. Even absent of
best practices
I run a program that uses large arrays.
I don't want it to use swap, because it's
too slow. I want the program to fail when
there's not enough RAM, rather than using
swap. How to do this?
Is it something to do with these kernel
variables:
kern.dfldsiz: 34359738368
kern.dflssiz: 8388608
On Mar 9, 2013, at 15:55, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote:
I run a program that uses large arrays.
I don't want it to use swap, because it's
too slow. I want the program to fail when
there's not enough RAM, rather than using
swap. How to do this?
If it were me I would start
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.ukwrote:
I run a program that uses large arrays.
I don't want it to use swap, because it's
too slow. I want the program to fail when
there's not enough RAM, rather than using
swap. How to do this?
Is it something to do
From m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com Sun Mar 10 00:25:27 2013
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Anton Shterenlikht
me...@bristol.ac.ukwrote:
I run a program that uses large arrays.
I don't want it to use swap, because it's
too slow. I want the program to fail
want it to use swap, because it's
too slow. I want the program to fail when
there's not enough RAM, rather than using
swap. How to do this?
Is it something to do with these kernel
variables:
kern.dfldsiz: 34359738368
with GELI.
Every time I boot up my computer, I get a request to enter the Encryption
password for swap. swap is not encrypted and should not be asking for an
encryption password.
I have checked and ensured that there are no providers for geli for the
ada0p3 partition. Any one have
.
Just for the purpose of explaining, when I did this
gpart add -a 4k -s 4G -t freebsd-swap -l SWAP ada0
it created swap as ada0p3, ada0p1 having been labeled as boot-loader ,
ada0p2 having been labeled as boot and ada0p4 as root. this failed on all
attempts. But when I changed the ordering
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Mike Barnard mike.barna...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am running FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE and I am experiencing some strange
behaviour with GELI.
Every time I boot up my computer, I get a request to enter the Encryption
password for swap. swap is not encrypted
a request to enter the Encryption
password for swap. swap is not encrypted and should not be asking for an
encryption password.
I have checked and ensured that there are no providers for geli for the
ada0p3 partition. Any one have pointers on what I could check for to
rectify this.
in /etc
Hi,
I'm using a ZFS mirror, and had a disc fail. I had a spare unused disc
in the case, and just switched over to that, after partitioning it
with gpart. ZFS is great, just have to say that.
But I'm not sure about the correct way to bring the new swap partition
online. Do I use gmirror label
the correct way to bring the new swap partition
online. Do I use gmirror label, as I did when I created it? Or gmirror
insert? Or something else. I'm using the round-robin balancing
algorithm, if that matters.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Scott
The handbook or man page on gmirror cover
On 07/09/2012 06:55 PM, David Christensen wrote:
I wrote:
https://www.dan.me.uk/blog/2012/05/06/full-disk-encryption-with-zfs-root-for-freebsd-9-x/
On 07/09/2012 09:43 AM, Colin Barnabas wrote:
Perhaps this will help-
http://www.aisecure.net/2011/11/28/root-zfs-freebsd9/
Thanks for the
On 11/07/2012 16:25, Joseph Lenox wrote:
On 07/09/2012 06:55 PM, David Christensen wrote:
I wrote:
https://www.dan.me.uk/blog/2012/05/06/full-disk-encryption-with-zfs-root-for-freebsd-9-x/
On 07/09/2012 09:43 AM, Colin Barnabas wrote:
Perhaps this will help-
freebsd-questions:
It is possible to install FreeBSD with an encrypted ZFS root and
encrypted swap using FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1?
I'm looking for something similar to the Debian installer, which
provides disk partitioning, file system creation, mounts, LUKS, LVM, etc..
TIA,
David
Perhaps this will help-
http://www.aisecure.net/2011/11/28/root-zfs-freebsd9/
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 07:13:05AM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
freebsd-questions:
It is possible to install FreeBSD with an encrypted ZFS root and
encrypted swap using FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1?
I'm
Hi there.
Now I'm using FreeBSD 9 without swap, and without additional swap -
related configurations.
Ξ ~ → gpart show
= 34 234441581 ada0 GPT (111G)
34128 1 freebsd-boot (64k)
162 234441453 2 freebsd-zfs (111G)
Ξ ~ → pstat -T
3857/12328 files
0M
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:22:37 +0300
mbsd wrote:
Hi there.
Now I'm using FreeBSD 9 without swap, and without additional swap -
related configurations.
..
And the question is:
Does it correct to use freebsd like this? Or I need specific setup?
Option NO_SWAPPING if I understand right
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:48:13 +0100
RW wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:22:37 +0300
mbsd wrote:
Hi there.
Now I'm using FreeBSD 9 without swap, and without additional swap -
related configurations.
..
And the question is:
Does it correct to use freebsd like this? Or I need specific
At 10:54 AM 5/29/2012, Warren Block wrote:
Recently I rearranged partitions on an SSD. The swap partition was
eliminated in favor of a swap file on /usr. This works, allows TRIM
support on the swap space, and is easier to resize than a partition.
However, sometimes the system panics
Recently I rearranged partitions on an SSD. The swap partition was
eliminated in favor of a swap file on /usr. This works, allows TRIM
support on the swap space, and is easier to resize than a partition.
However, sometimes the system panics on shutdown. It happens after
syncing disks, so
On 3/30/12 5:48 PM, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
After reading several sparse articles/post, I've come to the conclusion
that FreeBSD doesn't do well with SWAP 32GB; however it does allow it.
As such I decided to drop the swap to 8GB*2=16GB. Sadly that didn't
help either after dropping
On 03/28/12 03:09, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
It works out to roughly 7.7GB from 32MB okay fine.
If I double it, that should give me 15.4GB from 64MB (still not enough).
If I 16x it that should give me 246GB from 512MB. Thats more my
physical ram + swap. Oh well.
After reading several
it, that should give me 15.4GB from 64MB (still not enough).
If I 16x it that should give me 246GB from 512MB. Thats more my
physical ram + swap. Oh well.
I've seen John Baldwin write on lists
o) you have another problem if the default isn't enough
o) when it panics I pick up the crash dump swap
/var/log/messages
Mar 23 22:21:50 sabertooth kernel: swap zone exhausted, increase
kern.maxswzone
Mar 23 22:21:50 sabertooth kernel: pid 86697 (mysqld), uid 88, was
killed: out of swap space
how to repeat:
$ mysql -ux file.sql (~150GB) worth
basically, it slows down continually until it dies
: swap zone exhausted, increase
kern.maxswzone
Mar 23 22:21:50 sabertooth kernel: pid 86697 (mysqld), uid 88, was
killed: out of swap space
how to repeat:
$ mysql -ux file.sql (~150GB) worth
basically, it slows down continually until it dies. IF you (suspend)
the process in time
is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap?
A df seems to avoid the swap area.
This would be on a live production server.
Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd
On 2/17/2012 6:54 PM, Jim Pazarena wrote:
is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap?
% pstat -T
438/12328 files
98M/10240M swap space
---Mike
--
---
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications, m...@sentex.net
Providing Internet
On Feb 17, 2012, at 3:54 PM, Jim Pazarena wrote:
is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap?
A df seems to avoid the swap area.
You're looking for swapinfo
Regards,
--
-Chuck
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Feb 17, 2012 6:55 PM, Jim Pazarena fqu...@paz.bz wrote:
is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap?
A df seems to avoid the swap area.
This would be on a live production server.
Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
On 02/17/2012 15:58, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Feb 17, 2012, at 3:54 PM, Jim Pazarena wrote:
is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap?
A df seems to avoid the swap area.
You're looking for swapinfo
Regards,
Chuck beat me to it.
swapinfo or top are the two ways I
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Robison, Dave
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 4:11 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: swap space
On 02/17/2012 15:58, Chuck Swiger wrote
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri Feb 17 17:59:50 2012
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:54:18 -0800
From: Jim Pazarena fqu...@paz.bz
To: FreeBSD Mailing List freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: swap space
is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap?
A df
Dennis Glatting free...@penx.com wrote:
This is a proof-of-concept project ...
I am doing it on the cheap ...
I have committed to the project five machines. Three run over
clocked Phenom II x6 processors with 16GB of RAM, 1TB disk for
the OS, 1TB disk for Junk, and a 3-2TB disk RAIDz array
At 07:08 14/10/2011, Dennis Glatting wrote:
This is kind of stupid question but at a minimum I thought it would
be interesting to know.
What is the limitations in terms of swap devices under RELENG_8 (or 9)?
A single swap dev appears to be limited to 32GB (there are
truncation messages
On 10/14/2011 8:08 AM, Dennis Glatting wrote:
This is kind of stupid question but at a minimum I thought it would be
interesting to know.
What is the limitations in terms of swap devices under RELENG_8 (or 9)?
A single swap dev appears to be limited to 32GB (there are truncation
messages
On 10/14/2011 11:43 AM, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On 10/14/2011 8:08 AM, Dennis Glatting wrote:
This is kind of stupid question but at a minimum I thought it would be
interesting to know.
What is the limitations in terms of swap devices under RELENG_8 (or 9)?
A single swap dev appears
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 10/14/2011 11:43 AM, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On 10/14/2011 8:08 AM, Dennis Glatting wrote:
This is kind of stupid question but at a minimum I thought it would be
interesting to know.
What is the limitations in terms of swap devices under
This is kind of stupid question but at a minimum I thought it would be
interesting to know.
What is the limitations in terms of swap devices under RELENG_8 (or 9)?
A single swap dev appears to be limited to 32GB (there are truncation
messages on boot). I am looking at a possible need of 2
Thanks Matthew / Michael for your responses on this.
On 9/14/2011 2:51 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 14/09/2011 18:27, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
... In these days of plentiful RAM, the new rule of thumb is
Good morning all,
Each operating system seems to have different documentation regarding
what a decent swap size is for systems with large amounts of RAM. My
system only has 8GB of RAM. Some people have gone with the general idea
that 2X the amount of RAM is sufficient but for systems
On 14/09/2011 13:34, Jonathan Vomacka wrote:
Each operating system seems to have different documentation regarding
what a decent swap size is for systems with large amounts of RAM. My
system only has 8GB of RAM. Some people have gone with the general idea
that 2X the amount of RAM
Excellent response. Thank you so much.
On Sep 14, 2011 9:56 AM, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 14/09/2011 13:34, Jonathan Vomacka wrote:
Each operating system seems to have different documentation regarding
what a decent swap size is for systems with large amounts
On 14/09/2011 18:27, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
... In these days of plentiful RAM, the new rule of thumb is if you're
swapping, then you're doing it wrong.
I think your response follows the excellent
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:55:53 +0100
Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 14/09/2011 13:34, Jonathan Vomacka wrote:
Either from the FreeBSD docs, or based on personal experiences,
what is the recommended swap space for a 8GB system? Your opinions
are greatly appreciated
The old rule of thumb of swap
get my core dump in /var/cache when the
machine
reboots.
Any ideas??
Daryl,
A couple of questions:
1) How big is your swap partition? Is it large enough to hold the crash dump?
2) What type of hardware is this? I know that HP Proliants using the CISS raid
control fail to produce
get my core dump in /var/cache when the machine
reboots.
Any ideas??
Daryl,
A couple of questions:
1) How big is your swap partition? Is it large enough to hold the crash dump?
2) What type of hardware is this? I know that HP Proliants using the CISS raid
control fail to produce
I have a FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE (64bit) system with 4G mem installed. I have
had a few kernel panics over the last few weeks and would like to capture
a core dump. I have added the following to /etc/rc.conf
dumpdev=AUTO
dumpdir=/var/crash
The /var/crash is a 5G filesystem (with 4.8G free).
When the
Hi,
On FreeBSD RELEASE 8.2 I'm trying to install sudo with commands:
# cd /usr/ports/security/sudo/
# make install clean
..
swap_pager: out of swap space
swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
..
c++: Internal error: Killed: 9 (program cc1plus)
..
..
*** Error code 1
What can I do to solve
On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Paul Chany wrote:
swap_pager: out of swap space
swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
..
c++: Internal error: Killed: 9 (program cc1plus)
..
..
*** Error code 1
What can I do to solve this problem
Your system ran out of VM. Add more RAM, or add more swapspace
2011-04-04 21:01 keltezéssel, Chuck Swiger írta:
On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Paul Chany wrote:
swap_pager: out of swap space
swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
..
c++: Internal error: Killed: 9 (program cc1plus)
..
..
*** Error code 1
What can I do to solve this problem
Your
On Apr 4, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Paul Chany wrote:
I follow the link:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/adding-swap-space.html
I did create a swapfile, and run again command: '# make install clean'.
Since thet it being running on my old Toshiba laptop that had 64 MB RAM
dumped)
Feb 23 17:14:13 gold kernel: pid 10386 (epiphany), uid 0: exited on signal 11
(core dumped)
Feb 23 17:18:19 gold kernel: pid 10414 (epiphany), uid 0: exited on signal 11
(core dumped)
Feb 24 14:56:05 gold kernel: swap zone exhausted, increase kern.maxswzone
Feb 24 14:56:36 gold last message
kern.maxswzone
kern.maxswzone: Maximum memory for swap metadata
man 8 loader gives:
kern.maxswzone
Limits the amount of KVM to be used to hold swap meta
information, which directly governs the maximum amount of
swap the system can support
X RAM is a lot of disk space nowadays -- so either you'll need to find
some other use for that space; eg. as a swap-backed /tmp partition,
or else provide less swap. Also, there's a maximum of -- I think -- 8GB
swap above which the performance of swap is degraded, due to algorithmic
limits
have quantities of RAM measured in Megabytes rather than
Gigabytes.
Of course, in those days disk space was measured in MBytes too.
Also, there's a maximum of -- I think -- 8GB
swap above which the performance of swap is degraded, due to algorithmic
limits
I will be installing 8.1 on a Dell Poweredge 2850, with dual 3 GHz XEON
processors and 6GB RAM.
What is the recommended swap space?
I'm finding conflicting data on this. Some say 0, some say 1 times RAM,
others say stay with 2 x RAM.
Thank you
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Jeff Whitman jwhit...@jwnetsource.comwrote:
I will be installing 8.1 on a Dell Poweredge 2850, with dual 3 GHz XEON
processors and 6GB RAM.
What is the recommended swap space?
I'm finding conflicting data on this. Some say 0, some say 1 times RAM,
others
I will be installing 8.1 on a Dell Poweredge 2850, with dual 3 GHz XEON
processors and 6GB RAM.
What is the recommended swap space?
I'm finding conflicting data on this. Some say 0, some say 1 times RAM,
others say stay with 2 x RAM.
Definitely not 0, but 2x would probably be way too
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:20:48 -0600
Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if necessary one could add (and
activate) a secondary / additional swap file if necessary without
rebooting. So maybe start with a few gig and add an additional swap
file if necessary
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if necessary one could add (and
activate) a secondary / additional swap file if necessary without
rebooting. So maybe start with a few gig and add an additional swap
file if necessary?
Swapping to a file is really slow and should only be done if absolutely
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if necessary one could add (and
activate) a secondary / additional swap file if necessary without
rebooting. So maybe start with a few gig and add an additional swap
file if necessary
1 - 100 of 695 matches
Mail list logo
