Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!apollo.hp.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet From: John Dyson <dysonj@delphi.com> Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: Notes on the *new* FreeBSD V1.1 VM system Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 11:53:26 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Lines: 17 Message-ID: <RA0Jn4G.dysonj@delphi.com> References: <BcxpGux.dysonj@delphi.com> <2ke3ss$l0d@u.cc.utah.edu> <Ja4p+zR.dysonj@delphi.com> <2kfcur$dd1@germany.eu.net> <2kgdcd$mls@usenet.pa.dec.com> <2kkqib$h2h@Germany.EU.net> <CLutBp.4K9@flatlin.ka.sub.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1c.delphi.com X-To: Christoph Badura <bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org> Christoph Badura <bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org> writes: >Getting it right means, not overcommiting VM and not killing random >processes. The cited versions simply fail the system call that >requests more VM when no more is available. FreeBSD V1.2 (future, not present release) will be closer than the current release. The problem with the current *fix* is that I temporarily solved a problem of the MACH VM causing the system to hang. Keep on discussing it!!! I need good input. I think that we are eventually going to support either behaviour. On my machine, it would be a *GREAT* loss to support no overcommit, but I can understand that in many cases we need to pre-allocate VM resources. I need MORE input -- keep on talking about it (and other things!!!) John dyson@implode.root.com