Wojciech Puchar wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> writes:
>
> > does OS X kernel share any code with FreeBSD kernel's memory management
> > subsystem ?
>
> IMHO no. OSX is somehow-microkernel based, they did take things from
> FreeBSD but not this IMHO.
>
> any
Wojciech Puchar wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> writes:
>
> >
> > "2) Inactive memory (which is memory that has been recently used but is no
> > longer) is supposed to be seamlessly reclaimed automatically by the OS when
> > needed for new programs. In practice, I?ve found that this isn?t the case,
> >
is relatively new. My guess is that if there is a problem it's ZFS
specific. If it were a more general problem I think we'd see a lot more
complaints, whereas ZFS already has a reputation for needing lots of
memory.
you may precisely set up a limits of memory that ZFS would use at most. or
just
real problem
analysis, only a wild mix of stuff non-related to FreeBSD sprinkled with some
magic 'memory management' dust.
The fact that FreeBSD DOES NOT page excessively on the same workload
relative to other OS (linux, netbsd) is one of most important thing i
decided to use it.
I
"2) Inactive memory (which is memory that has been recently used but is no
longer) is supposed to be seamlessly reclaimed automatically by the OS when
needed for new programs. In practice, I?ve found that this isn?t the case, and
my system slows to a crawl and starts paging out to disk when free
most importantly networking but certainly not memory subsystem.
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Apr 25, 2012, at 5:31 AM, jb wrote:
does OS X kernel share any code with FreeBSD kernel's memory management
subsystem ?
The simple answer is no. A more complex answer:
% gre
does OS X kernel share any code with FreeBSD kernel's memory management
subsystem ?
IMHO no. OSX is somehow-microkernel based, they did take things from
FreeBSD but not this IMHO.
anyway - who cares
Something is deeply broken in OS X memory management
http://workstuff.tumblr.com
RW googlemail.com> writes:
> ...
> > ...
> > "2) Inactive memory (which is memory that has been recently used but
> > is no longer) is supposed to be seamlessly reclaimed automatically by
> > the OS when needed for new programs. In practice, I’ve found that
> > this isn’t the case, and my system
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:32:39 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
> Adam Vande More gmail.com> writes:
>
> > ...
> > http://workstuff.tumblr.com/post/19036310553/two-things-that-really-helped-
> > speed-up-my-mac-and
> > http://dywypi.org/2012/02/back-on-linux.html
> >
>
> "2) Inactive memory (which is memo
anything when userland and kernel are out of
sync, that is if it runs at all without segfaulting. World and kernel being
out of sync would be operator error. In this case the values you are using
to somehow relate the symptom to memory management would be false.
As far as all the rest, such as
Adam Vande More gmail.com> writes:
> ...
> http://workstuff.tumblr.com/post/19036310553/two-things-that-really-helped-
> speed-up-my-mac-and
> http://dywypi.org/2012/02/back-on-linux.html
>
"2) Inactive memory (which is memory that has been recently used but is no
longer) is supposed to be sea
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:04 AM, jb wrote:
> If so, should FreeBSD adopt NetBSD's MM subsys, or just improve itself
> surgically ?
>
You ought first establish there is a problem. What you have cited is
recently reinvigorated trend that has taken on the air of the "BDS is
dying" troll. What y
jb gmail.com> writes:
> ...
> "The related implementation in FreeBSD seems to have a similar problem:
>
> NetBSD users have also reported that UVM’s im- provements have had a positive
> effect on their applica- tions. This is most noticeable when physical memory
> becomes scarce and the VM syst
Chuck Swiger mac.com> writes:
>
> On Apr 25, 2012, at 5:31 AM, jb wrote:
> > does OS X kernel share any code with FreeBSD kernel's memory management
subsystem ?
>
> The simple answer is no. A more complex answer:
>
> % grep -ri freebsd xnu-1699.24.23 | w
On Apr 25, 2012, at 5:31 AM, jb wrote:
> does OS X kernel share any code with FreeBSD kernel's memory management
> subsystem ?
The simple answer is no. A more complex answer:
% grep -ri freebsd xnu-1699.24.23 | wc -l
520
% grep -ril freebsd xnu-1699.24.23 | sort | uniq
Hi,
does OS X kernel share any code with FreeBSD kernel's memory management
subsystem ?
Something is deeply broken in OS X memory management
http://workstuff.tumblr.com/post/20464780085/something-is-deeply-broken-in-os-x-
memory-management
One of the problems that caught my eyes was ina
[LoN]Kamikaze wrote:
>> Don't forget that the system also pages to swap space and it takes the
>> attitude of parking as much as possible out there in case it comes in
>> to demand again. Ten if it really needs the space for something, it
>> invalidates the oldest stuff and uses that space.
>>
>>
> Don't forget that the system also pages to swap space and it takes the
> attitude of parking as much as possible out there in case it comes in
> to demand again. Ten if it really needs the space for something, it
> invalidates the oldest stuff and uses that space.
>
> So, you should really exp
Dear all,
| Also remember that swap usage itself is not a bad thing; it just means
Problem solved. I should have thought about that earlier. Yesterday I was
playing with HotSaNIC software to use it on this box. In the end I decided
I didn't like it and I didn't really need it so I removed it fro
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 08:57:27AM +0100, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Is there a FBSD command to manage virtual memory? I think my swap size is
> now a bit too much used:
>
> last pid: 19824; load averages: 0.06, 0.05, 0.02 up 50+10:00:17
> 08:54:00
> 230 processes: 1 running,
In the last episode (Jan 20), Zbigniew Szalbot said:
> >> I see lots of them; every one in that list is contributinig. If
> >> you add up all those process sizes you'll see where the space is
> >> going.
> >
> > By which I mean the difference between size and res, which indicates
> > the amount of
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> hello,
>
>>> The problem is I cannot add more RAM (too old machine to do that) but I
>>> know what to do to decrease the load a bit. So thanks for the pointer! I
>>> appreciate it!
>> You might also want to stop using mod_php in apache and convert to
>> fastcgi setup - th
On Saturday 20 January 2007 08:57, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> Is there any way to handle swap size usage other than restarting the box?
Yes, you can add swap while the system is running with swapon(8). If you don't
have an empty partition available you could create one with mdconfig(8).
-Pieter
__
hello,
>> The problem is I cannot add more RAM (too old machine to do that) but I
>> know what to do to decrease the load a bit. So thanks for the pointer! I
>> appreciate it!
>
> You might also want to stop using mod_php in apache and convert to
> fastcgi setup - this way you'll get all Apache pr
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> The problem is I cannot add more RAM (too old machine to do that) but I
> know what to do to decrease the load a bit. So thanks for the pointer! I
> appreciate it!
You might also want to stop using mod_php in apache and convert to
fastcgi setup - this way you'll get all
Dear Kris and all,
>> I see lots of them; every one in that list is contributinig. If you
>> add up all those process sizes you'll see where the space is going.
>
> By which I mean the difference between size and res, which indicates
> the amount of process memory allocated but not currently resi
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 03:51:38AM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:13:48AM +0100, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> > Hello again,
> >
> > >> The swap size usage grow so big probably because I started wget to
> > >> download an iso image and then WinSCP to grab it from the FBSD ma
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:13:48AM +0100, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> >> The swap size usage grow so big probably because I started wget to
> >> download an iso image and then WinSCP to grab it from the FBSD machine
> >> to my laptop. When I started wget, the swap usage was around
Hello again,
>> The swap size usage grow so big probably because I started wget to
>> download an iso image and then WinSCP to grab it from the FBSD machine
>> to my laptop. When I started wget, the swap usage was around 19% and
>> had been like that for many days.
>
> That should not cause such
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 08:57:27AM +0100, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Is there a FBSD command to manage virtual memory? I think my swap size is
> now a bit too much used:
>
> last pid: 19824; load averages: 0.06, 0.05, 0.02 up 50+10:00:17
> 08:54:00
> 230 processes: 1 running,
Dear all,
Is there a FBSD command to manage virtual memory? I think my swap size is
now a bit too much used:
last pid: 19824; load averages: 0.06, 0.05, 0.02 up 50+10:00:17
08:54:00
230 processes: 1 running, 227 sleeping, 2 zombie
CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.4% system, 0.8% int
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:53:05 +0100 (BST)
hossein ghahghaei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> how manage freebsd the memory ?
The answer is a bit too complex to provide via a mailing list.
I recommend you get a copy of _The_Design_and_Implementation_of_
_FreeBSD_. It has all the details you could ever
how manage freebsd the memory ?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAI
33 matches
Mail list logo
