Re: swap space
> 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 > To: FreeBSD Mailing List > Subject: swap space > > is there a command which can show the size of the hard drive swap? > > A "df" seems to avoid the swap area. That *is* "expected" behavior. 'df' shows utilization of -filesystems-. 'swap' is not filesystem. > This would be on a live production server. The "traditional" means is 'pstat -s'. On relatively modern systems, 'swapinfo' is an alias. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: swap space
> -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: > > 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 normally check. > I'm digging the fact that it now accepts "-h" to produce human-readable sizes. swapinfo didn't always support "-h" -- Devin _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap space
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 normally check. -- Dave Robison Sales Solution Architect II FIS Banking Solutions 510/621-2089 (w) 530/518-5194 (c) 510/621-2020 (f) da...@vicor.com david.robi...@fisglobal.com _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap space
On Feb 17, 2012 6:55 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. > > This would be on a live production server. > Thanks. > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Top or vmstat ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap space
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 list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap space
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 services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada http://www.tancsa.com/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
swap space
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-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
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 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 pedagogical principle: "a little inaccuracy saves a lot of explanation." But... disk is still (by far) the cheapest commodity, and the opportunistic paging algorithm manages VM very well. VM is not by any means obsolete, and seeing paging behavior is not a sign of a misconfigured system. Well, yes. I was certainly glossing over a lot of complexity -- but I would maintain that I am fundamentally correct. Having some pages swapped out is absolutely not a problem. True. In fact, it's a positive benefit: swapping out memory pages that are exceedingly rarely referenced makes more room in RAM for more actively used pages. On the other hand, having pages continually swapping in and out definitely is a problem in terms of performance, given that disk IO takes of the order of milliseconds, while reference to main RAM is of the order of microseconds or less. Orders of magnitude faster. Now, while disk may well be the much the cheapest storage medium available, that's only part of the expense. In fact, up-front capital expenditure on the kit (perhaps several thousand pounds/euros/dollars) is outweighed by the operational expense (power, cooling, hardware support etc.) over the life of the equipment, so spending a bit more (capex) on components that run at lower power (opex) makes a lot of sense. Even more, if the server is being used for eg. e-Commerce, then the volume of the transactions and the data processed by the server makes all the difference to your margin: the more you can do with the same hardware - viz, the more efficiently and faster you can make the hardware run - then the more profit you make. Buying more RAM is peanuts on that scale. Cheers, Matthew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
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 = 2 x RAM dates back to the days when > 128MB RAM was a big deal. Nowadays, you're likely to have that much > in your phone, and systems with 128GB RAM are not unknown. > > In these days of plentiful RAM, the new rule of thumb is "if you're > swapping, then you're doing it wrong." There is a caveat that on desktop grade motherboards, expanding beyond 8GB can slow the system down, as populating 4 slots can cause the memory to run at a slower speed. > My recommendation: for systems with 1GB RAM or more, and that don't > make heavy use of memory filesystems and the like, then 2GB swap is > ample, and you can probably get away with as little as 1GB at need. If you have 8GB of ram and you can get away with 1GB of swap, then you presumably could get away with none. This question recently came up on "hackers", and someone posted top output from a 12GB system showing a 23GB openoffice process and 21GB of swap in use after opening a large spreadsheet file. I think there's a reasonable case for providing enough swap to cope with abnormal memory use. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
On 14/09/2011 18:27, Michael Sierchio wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Matthew Seaman > 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 pedagogical principle: "a > little inaccuracy saves a lot of explanation." But... disk is still > (by far) the cheapest commodity, and the opportunistic paging > algorithm manages VM very well. VM is not by any means obsolete, and > seeing paging behavior is not a sign of a misconfigured system. Well, yes. I was certainly glossing over a lot of complexity -- but I would maintain that I am fundamentally correct. Having some pages swapped out is absolutely not a problem. True. In fact, it's a positive benefit: swapping out memory pages that are exceedingly rarely referenced makes more room in RAM for more actively used pages. On the other hand, having pages continually swapping in and out definitely is a problem in terms of performance, given that disk IO takes of the order of milliseconds, while reference to main RAM is of the order of microseconds or less. Orders of magnitude faster. Now, while disk may well be the much the cheapest storage medium available, that's only part of the expense. In fact, up-front capital expenditure on the kit (perhaps several thousand pounds/euros/dollars) is outweighed by the operational expense (power, cooling, hardware support etc.) over the life of the equipment, so spending a bit more (capex) on components that run at lower power (opex) makes a lot of sense. Even more, if the server is being used for eg. e-Commerce, then the volume of the transactions and the data processed by the server makes all the difference to your margin: the more you can do with the same hardware - viz, the more efficiently and faster you can make the hardware run - then the more profit you make. Buying more RAM is peanuts on that scale. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Matthew Seaman 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 pedagogical principle: "a little inaccuracy saves a lot of explanation." But... disk is still (by far) the cheapest commodity, and the opportunistic paging algorithm manages VM very well. VM is not by any means obsolete, and seeing paging behavior is not a sign of a misconfigured system. Regards, - Michael ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
Excellent response. Thank you so much.
On Sep 14, 2011 9:56 AM, "Matthew Seaman"
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 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 with large
> > amounts of memory 1X the amount of RAM is fine. I was also told that
> > anything over 2GB of SWAP space will cause performance issues on the
> > system and that it is not recommended.
> >
> > 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 = 2 x RAM dates back to the days when
> 128MB RAM was a big deal. Nowadays, you're likely to have that much in
> your phone, and systems with 128GB RAM are not unknown.
>
> In these days of plentiful RAM, the new rule of thumb is "if you're
> swapping, then you're doing it wrong." You don't need anything like as
> much swap nowadays, at least, not as compensation for lack of RAM. You
> may need swap to back eg. tmpfs filesystems. You don't need swap
> nowadays for system dumps -- any partition with ephemeral data (or no
> data at all) can be used for dumping, and given that minidump capability
> exists now, you don't even need to supply the 1 x RAM + delta required
> for a full dump.
>
> That swap > 2GB resulted in performance problems was certainly true
> once, but I doubt very much that it is still the case in HEAD or the
> upcoming 9.0-RELEASE, nor probably in {7,8}-STABLE. IIRC the problem
> was due to avoiding integer overflow in some calculations deep inside
> the VM system, which is usually not a hugely difficult problem to fix.
>
> My recommendation: for systems with 1GB RAM or more, and that don't make
> heavy use of memory filesystems and the like, then 2GB swap is ample,
> and you can probably get away with as little as 1GB at need.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Matthew
>
> --
> Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
> Flat 3
> PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
> JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW
>
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
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 is sufficient but for systems with large
> amounts of memory 1X the amount of RAM is fine. I was also told that
> anything over 2GB of SWAP space will cause performance issues on the
> system and that it is not recommended.
>
> 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 = 2 x RAM dates back to the days when
128MB RAM was a big deal. Nowadays, you're likely to have that much in
your phone, and systems with 128GB RAM are not unknown.
In these days of plentiful RAM, the new rule of thumb is "if you're
swapping, then you're doing it wrong." You don't need anything like as
much swap nowadays, at least, not as compensation for lack of RAM. You
may need swap to back eg. tmpfs filesystems. You don't need swap
nowadays for system dumps -- any partition with ephemeral data (or no
data at all) can be used for dumping, and given that minidump capability
exists now, you don't even need to supply the 1 x RAM + delta required
for a full dump.
That swap > 2GB resulted in performance problems was certainly true
once, but I doubt very much that it is still the case in HEAD or the
upcoming 9.0-RELEASE, nor probably in {7,8}-STABLE. IIRC the problem
was due to avoiding integer overflow in some calculations deep inside
the VM system, which is usually not a hugely difficult problem to fix.
My recommendation: for systems with 1GB RAM or more, and that don't make
heavy use of memory filesystems and the like, then 2GB swap is ample,
and you can probably get away with as little as 1GB at need.
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Recommended SWAP space for large amounts of ram (8GB)
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 with large amounts of memory 1X the amount of RAM is fine. I was also told that anything over 2GB of SWAP space will cause performance issues on the system and that it is not recommended. 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 Kind Regards, Jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap_pager: out of swap space, swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
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 and > 16 MB swap space but with swapfile it has much more VM. > > Thanks! You're most welcome. With only 64MB of RAM, you probably want at least 256MB of swapspace handy, but that depends on what you are running, of course... Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap_pager: out of swap space, swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
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 system ran out of VM. Add more RAM, or add more swapspace, or consider "top -o size" and kill off anything huge. Also, compiling with -O0 or -O instead of the default -O2 will reduce the size of the compiler process significantly. Regards, 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 and 16 MB swap space but with swapfile it has much more VM. Thanks! Regards, Paul ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: swap_pager: out of swap space, swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
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, or consider "top -o size" and kill off anything huge. Also, compiling with -O0 or -O instead of the default -O2 will reduce the size of the compiler process significantly. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
swap_pager: out of swap space, swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed
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 this problem? -- Best Regards, Paul ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Swap Space
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 09:42:36AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 05/01/2011 22:33, Jeff Whitman wrote: > > I'm finding conflicting data on this. Some say 0, some say 1 times RAM, > > others say stay with 2 x RAM. > > Standard advice is 2x RAM -- but that dates back to the days when > servers would 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 in the way memory pages are mapped onto disk pages. I don't know about an 8GB limit for swap performance. I suppose it is possible.So, the following formula from Mathew is probably a good new rule of thumb. > > You need 1 x RAM + a few kB in order to support getting a crashdump. Or > at least, you did before the days of minidumps. Not sure what the > requirements are for getting system dumps nowadays. Swap space used for > crashdumps should be a raw partition, not a file. jerry > > On the other hand, for good performance you should not be using any > significant amounts of swap in normal usage. You will need some swap, > as the OS tends to use a small amount even when not under memory > pressure. You should have swap to act as a buffer in case your machine > suddenly starts using up more memory than you expect, either because of > memory leaks, or due to demand spikes or through any number of other > possible causes. > > Therefore, I think the best advice for a modern large memory system > would be: > > If RAM > 8GB, then SWAP = 8GB[*] > If RAM < 8GB, then SWAP = 1 x RAM + delta > > where delta is perhaps a Megabyte or so. Just rounding the partition > size up to the next cylinder boundary should be enough (which happens > automatically with most partitioning schemes). > > Cheers, > > Matthew > > [*] In this case, if you need crashdumps, you should dedicate another > otherwise unused partition of the correct size as your dumpdev. > > -- > Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard > Flat 3 > PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate > JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Swap Space
On 05/01/2011 22:33, Jeff Whitman wrote: > I'm finding conflicting data on this. Some say 0, some say 1 times RAM, > others say stay with 2 x RAM. Standard advice is 2x RAM -- but that dates back to the days when servers would have quantities of RAM measured in Megabytes rather than Gigabytes. 2 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 in the way memory pages are mapped onto disk pages. You need 1 x RAM + a few kB in order to support getting a crashdump. Or at least, you did before the days of minidumps. Not sure what the requirements are for getting system dumps nowadays. Swap space used for crashdumps should be a raw partition, not a file. On the other hand, for good performance you should not be using any significant amounts of swap in normal usage. You will need some swap, as the OS tends to use a small amount even when not under memory pressure. You should have swap to act as a buffer in case your machine suddenly starts using up more memory than you expect, either because of memory leaks, or due to demand spikes or through any number of other possible causes. Therefore, I think the best advice for a modern large memory system would be: If RAM > 8GB, then SWAP = 8GB[*] If RAM < 8GB, then SWAP = 1 x RAM + delta where delta is perhaps a Megabyte or so. Just rounding the partition size up to the next cylinder boundary should be enough (which happens automatically with most partitioning schemes). Cheers, Matthew [*] In this case, if you need crashdumps, you should dedicate another otherwise unused partition of the correct size as your dumpdev. -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Swap Space
On 01/05/11 15:20, Gary Gatten wrote: 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 much IMO. 4 - 6 GB should be enough for most use cases. 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? "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" yep man swapon though this won't be as elegant as having it set up as normal swap -- Dave Robison Sales Solution Architect II FIS Banking Solutions 510/621-2089 (w) 530/518-5194 (c) 510/621-2020 (f) da...@vicor.com david.robi...@fisglobal.com _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. _ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Swap Space
Adam Vande More writes: > > 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 much IMO. 4 - > 6 GB should be enough for most use cases. One data point: last pid: 58457; load averages: 1.91, 2.20, 2.27 up 8+19:16:27 18:51:23 166 processes: 5 running, 158 sleeping, 2 stopped, 1 zombie Mem: 1541M Active, 1267M Inact, 1223M Wired, 195M Cache, 802M Buf, 3440M Free Swap: 18G Total, 11M Used, 18G Free (That's 8g total memory.) It's a fairly lightly loaded workstation. A philosophical consideration: modern disks are cheap, and fairly fast. Repartitioning if you don't have enough is a pain. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Swap Space - hijack?
> 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 necessary since every read/write has to go through the filesystem code which it doesn't do if done via a swap slice. Good point. It's been several years and back on v5 or 6 when I did something like this. If there's unpartitioned space on the drive, can one add a secondary swap partition real-time? I forget what I did here - I'm sure I followed what's in the handbook re swap space. Probably did a swap file... Yes you can do that with swapon(1) It's been said though that FreeBSD memory paging algorithms take into account the system's entire available VM for deciding on when to act in low memory conditions and these parameters are tuned expect some of that to be swap space. That is why one reason there *should* be a least some swap space even on a system w/ plenty of RAM. Sorry for the probable hijack... Speaking of swapping algorithms, is there a way to force a parent and all child processes to NOT be swapped - period - and always remain 100% in "real" memory? And if so, is it discouraged or completely up to the sysadmin? "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Swap Space
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Gary Gatten 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? > > Swapping to a file is really slow and should only be done if absolutely > necessary since every read/write has to go through the filesystem code > which it doesn't do if done via a swap slice. > > Good point. It's been several years and back on v5 or 6 when I did > something like this. If there's unpartitioned space on the drive, can one > add a secondary swap partition real-time? I forget what I did here - I'm > sure I followed what's in the handbook re swap space. Probably did a swap > file... > Yes you can do that with swapon(1) It's been said though that FreeBSD memory paging algorithms take into account the system's entire available VM for deciding on when to act in low memory conditions and these parameters are tuned expect some of that to be swap space. That is why one reason there *should* be a least some swap space even on a system w/ plenty of RAM. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Swap Space
> 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 necessary since every read/write has to go through the filesystem code which it doesn't do if done via a swap slice. Good point. It's been several years and back on v5 or 6 when I did something like this. If there's unpartitioned space on the drive, can one add a secondary swap partition real-time? I forget what I did here - I'm sure I followed what's in the handbook re swap space. Probably did a swap file... "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Swap Space
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:20:48 -0600 Gary Gatten 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? Swapping to a file is really slow and should only be done if absolutely necessary since every read/write has to go through the filesystem code which it doesn't do if done via a swap slice. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Swap Space
> 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 much IMO. 4 - 6 GB should be enough for most use cases. 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? "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Swap Space
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Jeff Whitman wrote: > 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 much IMO. 4 - 6 GB should be enough for most use cases. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Swap Space
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 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: VirtualBox: out of swap space
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 17:37:39 +0200, Samuel Martín Moro
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I'm trying to have a few BSD VMs (4.7, 5.5, 6.2, 7.2, 8.1)
> running under VirtualBox-OSE / FreeBSD-8.1-RELEASE-amd64
>
>
> First problem:
> Sometimes, when I start a VM, all other running VM stop,
> their status switch to 'abort' (or whatever the
> traduction is, here it's "avorté").
> Reading my /var/log/messages, I see a few
> 'pid (VirtualBox), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space'
>
> I've got 8Gb of RAM, and so assumed I wouldn't need any swap.
> Was I wrong?
> Have I to reinstall my server to add some swap?
> (and if so, how much?!)
Samuel,
It is generally a bad idea not to have a swap partition. I have 12GB
of memory and I even hit swap, though very little.
[tethys]:/home/rnejdl> swapinfo -h
Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity
/dev/ada0s1b 4194304 4.5M 4.0G 0%
I have 4GB on mine and that is plenty.
I don't have answers for the below though.
Sincerely,
Rusty Nejdl
>
>
> btw, my PC (home) have the same HWare (core i7 930, 8Gb DDR3)
> I can run two 8.1-RELEASE (amd64 + i386), and two debian
> while host is running compiz and all that gay stuff...
> (ArchLinux x86_64)
>
> except VirtualBox, the server I'm having problems with, is
> hosting some nfs shares and running ion2 (since VBoxVNC
> segfaults... I need a WM). And that's it.
>
>
> Second problem:
> When I'm creating a disk (in VirtualBox), and while there's
> some scp or so running on other guests, these guests display
> some gvfs errors, about not finding ad0.
> Sometimes, they just halt, and wait I pressed a key to reboot.
>
>
> Third problem:
> I already posted that on emulation this morning:
> I can't boot FreeBSD-8.1-amd64. It's stuck in
> 'md0: preloaded image x bytes 0xsomewhere'
> nothing else happend...
>
>
> I could have finished already if I just had installed a Linux
> host in the first place...
> I read so much posts recently, from FreeBSD/VBox users, saying
> everything's working just fine.
> I assumed it would be OK.
> Obviously not...
>
> Is there some hope sticking with BSD?
> (if I can get rid of the swap and the 8.1 problems, it would
> be fine enough)
>
>
> I'm seriously thinking on dropping that BSD idea, and choosing
> some random linux to make it work... (and maybe, try xen...)
>
>
> What should I do?
>
> Thanks for any advices.
>
>
> Samuel Martín Moro
> {EPITECH.} tek4
> CamTrace S.A.S
> (+033) 1 41 38 37 60
> 1 Allée de la Venelle
> 92150 Suresnes
> FRANCE
>
> "Nobody wants to say how this works.
> Maybe nobody knows ..."
> Xorg.conf(5)
> ___
> freebsd-emulat...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-emulation-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
VirtualBox: out of swap space
Hi,
I'm trying to have a few BSD VMs (4.7, 5.5, 6.2, 7.2, 8.1)
running under VirtualBox-OSE / FreeBSD-8.1-RELEASE-amd64
First problem:
Sometimes, when I start a VM, all other running VM stop,
their status switch to 'abort' (or whatever the
traduction is, here it's "avorté").
Reading my /var/log/messages, I see a few
'pid (VirtualBox), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space'
I've got 8Gb of RAM, and so assumed I wouldn't need any swap.
Was I wrong?
Have I to reinstall my server to add some swap?
(and if so, how much?!)
btw, my PC (home) have the same HWare (core i7 930, 8Gb DDR3)
I can run two 8.1-RELEASE (amd64 + i386), and two debian
while host is running compiz and all that gay stuff...
(ArchLinux x86_64)
except VirtualBox, the server I'm having problems with, is
hosting some nfs shares and running ion2 (since VBoxVNC
segfaults... I need a WM). And that's it.
Second problem:
When I'm creating a disk (in VirtualBox), and while there's
some scp or so running on other guests, these guests display
some gvfs errors, about not finding ad0.
Sometimes, they just halt, and wait I pressed a key to reboot.
Third problem:
I already posted that on emulation this morning:
I can't boot FreeBSD-8.1-amd64. It's stuck in
'md0: preloaded image x bytes 0xsomewhere'
nothing else happend...
I could have finished already if I just had installed a Linux
host in the first place...
I read so much posts recently, from FreeBSD/VBox users, saying
everything's working just fine.
I assumed it would be OK.
Obviously not...
Is there some hope sticking with BSD?
(if I can get rid of the swap and the 8.1 problems, it would
be fine enough)
I'm seriously thinking on dropping that BSD idea, and choosing
some random linux to make it work... (and maybe, try xen...)
What should I do?
Thanks for any advices.
Samuel Martín Moro
{EPITECH.} tek4
CamTrace S.A.S
(+033) 1 41 38 37 60
1 Allée de la Venelle
92150 Suresnes
FRANCE
"Nobody wants to say how this works.
Maybe nobody knows ..."
Xorg.conf(5)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: shrinking swap space
Robert & Chuck, Thanks for your answers... they sound like good clues. I'll need to read up some more to understand the answers :-) Thanks! -- John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: shrinking swap space
Hi-- On Jul 9, 2010, at 6:18 AM, John Almberg wrote: > Is there a utility that shows which programs are using swap space? Or that > can help debug this problem? Try: "top -o size" Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: shrinking swap space
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri Jul 9 08:18:56 2010 > Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 09:18:01 -0400 > From: John Almberg > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: shrinking swap space > > Since my server locked me out last week because it was out of swap > space, I've been monitoring the swap space every 4 hours. It started off > with 3% used and little by little it has crept up to 17% this morning. > > I've been reading up on the subject in my two FreeBSD books (Absolute > and Complete) but neither give me a hint on how to find the program(s) > that are slowly eating up my swap space. > > Is there a utility that shows which programs are using swap space? Or > that can help debug this problem? 'ps' is your friend. it will show you the 'total' memory used by each process, *AND* the 'working set' size. The working set is the part of that process's address-space that is currently mapped into RAM. The -difference- betwen the total size, and the working set size is the swap usage. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
shrinking swap space
Since my server locked me out last week because it was out of swap space, I've been monitoring the swap space every 4 hours. It started off with 3% used and little by little it has crept up to 17% this morning. I've been reading up on the subject in my two FreeBSD books (Absolute and Complete) but neither give me a hint on how to find the program(s) that are slowly eating up my swap space. Is there a utility that shows which programs are using swap space? Or that can help debug this problem? Thanks: JOhn ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 04:46:56PM +0100, Daniel Bye wrote: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 10:59:23AM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:57:07AM +0100, Daniel Bye wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > > > > > > > > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual > > > > > disk for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? > > > > > For example, I could do something like this: > > > > > > > > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to > > > > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for > > > > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to > > > > swap. > > > > That is self defeating. > > > > > > > > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. > > > > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. > > > > > > He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition > > > on > > > the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has > > > already > > > pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more > > > convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. > > > > > > And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a > > > couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. > > > > I understand using a file and making it in to swapspace. I have used that > > a couple of times when I needed to add some swap space temporarily. But > > isn't the command he is trying to use (mdconfig) for creating a memory > > filesystem - eg use a chunk of memory and make a file from it (then use it > > for swap or whatever)?That is in RAM. > > No, with the -t vnode and -f options, he'd actually be creating > a file-backed memory disk. The terminology can be a little confusing, but > in this instance the file wouldn't be loaded into RAM, but would instead > be treated as any other disk-like device. It's exactly the same approach > as used by /etc/rc.d/addswap, which gets its configuration from $swapfile > set in /etc/rc.conf. I see that now, but it seems like the long way around to get to what you get with a swapon. Oh well. jerry > > Dan > > -- > Daniel Bye > _ > ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) > - against HTML, vCards and X > - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:23:14AM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > Jerry McAllister writes: > > > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:57:07AM +0100, Daniel Bye wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > >> > > >> > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk > >> > > for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For > >> > > example, I could do something like this: > >> > > >> > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to > >> > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for > >> > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to > >> > swap. > >> > That is self defeating. > >> > > >> > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. > >> > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. > >> > >> He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition on > >> the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has already > >> pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more > >> convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. > >> > >> And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a > >> couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. > > > > I understand using a file and making it in to swapspace. I have used that > > a couple of times when I needed to add some swap space temporarily. But > > isn't the command he is trying to use (mdconfig) for creating a memory > > filesystem - eg use a chunk of memory and make a file from it (then use it > > for swap or whatever)?That is in RAM. > > Not necessarily. What he wants is the '-t vnode' option for mdconfig(8). Hmmm. Haven't dealt with that before. Still seems like either a regular file or a dedicated partition would be best. jerry > > -- > Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area > http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 10:59:23AM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:57:07AM +0100, Daniel Bye wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > > > > > > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk > > > > for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For > > > > example, I could do something like this: > > > > > > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to > > > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for > > > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to swap. > > > > > > That is self defeating. > > > > > > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. > > > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. > > > > He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition on > > the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has already > > pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more > > convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. > > > > And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a > > couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. > > I understand using a file and making it in to swapspace. I have used that > a couple of times when I needed to add some swap space temporarily. But > isn't the command he is trying to use (mdconfig) for creating a memory > filesystem - eg use a chunk of memory and make a file from it (then use it > for swap or whatever)?That is in RAM. No, with the -t vnode and -f options, he'd actually be creating a file-backed memory disk. The terminology can be a little confusing, but in this instance the file wouldn't be loaded into RAM, but would instead be treated as any other disk-like device. It's exactly the same approach as used by /etc/rc.d/addswap, which gets its configuration from $swapfile set in /etc/rc.conf. Dan -- Daniel Bye _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) - against HTML, vCards and X - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ pgpucoDWr6Wwu.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Using mdconfig for swap space
>It's easy to *try* the swap files. Then measure the performance. >If the behaviour is really as specific to your custom application as you >indicate, then general advice may not apply either. In fact, after discussing this with the team, we are going to do exactly that. We'll allocate an extra 8GB of swap space through an image file and let QA run their stress tests to see how things behave. That's the only way to know for sure if this will work for us. Thanks for the feedback. Peter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
Jerry McAllister writes: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:57:07AM +0100, Daniel Bye wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: >> > >> > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk >> > > for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For >> > > example, I could do something like this: >> > >> > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to >> > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for >> > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to swap. >> > That is self defeating. >> > >> > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. >> > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. >> >> He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition on >> the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has already >> pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more >> convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. >> >> And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a >> couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. > > I understand using a file and making it in to swapspace. I have used that > a couple of times when I needed to add some swap space temporarily. But > isn't the command he is trying to use (mdconfig) for creating a memory > filesystem - eg use a chunk of memory and make a file from it (then use it > for swap or whatever)?That is in RAM. Not necessarily. What he wants is the '-t vnode' option for mdconfig(8). -- Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
Peter Steele wrote: > Thanks for the responses. The reason I'm looking at doing this is > that we have increased memory on our platform from 4GB to 8GB and > therefore have to increase swap space from 8GB to 16GB. We have > enough space in our /var partition that we could add a swap file > there and not have to touch the existing partition layout. I like the > simplicity of the swap file approach, but we have an application that > is very sensitive to I/O performance and I'm a little wary what this > could mean. QA I know would have a field day in trying to pound the > system with all sorts of stress tests. I think a dedicated swap > partition is probably a safer option. Nowadays having swap twice as RAM is not necessary. If your system wasn't swapping much in the past you can safely stay with 4G in my opinion... extending it to 16G would be waste of space :) -- regards, Maciej Suszko. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
Peter Steele writes: >>Nowadays having swap twice as RAM is not necessary. If your system >>wasn't swapping much in the past you can safely stay with 4G in my >>opinion... extending it to 16G would be waste of space :) > > I won't bore you with the details but in fact our application *does* > require this much swap space, but not for the typical reasons. It's a > side effect of how our application works and we thought we could make > use of an image file for the extra swap rather than repartitioning, > but I've read too many warnings against going this route so I've > decided to stick with increasing the size of the swap partition. It's easy to *try* the swap files. Then measure the performance. If the behaviour is really as specific to your custom application as you indicate, then general advice may not apply either. -- Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:57:07AM +0100, Daniel Bye wrote: > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > > > > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk > > > for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For > > > example, I could do something like this: > > > > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to > > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for > > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to swap. > > That is self defeating. > > > > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. > > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. > > He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition on > the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has already > pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more > convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. > > And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a > couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. I understand using a file and making it in to swapspace. I have used that a couple of times when I needed to add some swap space temporarily. But isn't the command he is trying to use (mdconfig) for creating a memory filesystem - eg use a chunk of memory and make a file from it (then use it for swap or whatever)?That is in RAM. jerry > > Dan > > -- > Daniel Bye > _ > ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) > - against HTML, vCards and X > - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Using mdconfig for swap space
>Nowadays having swap twice as RAM is not necessary. If your system wasn't >swapping much in the past you can safely stay with 4G in my opinion... >extending it to 16G >would be waste of space :) I won't bore you with the details but in fact our application *does* require this much swap space, but not for the typical reasons. It's a side effect of how our application works and we thought we could make use of an image file for the extra swap rather than repartitioning, but I've read too many warnings against going this route so I've decided to stick with increasing the size of the swap partition. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Wednesday 09 September 2009 15:07:37 Peter Steele wrote: > Thanks for the responses. The reason I'm looking at doing this is that we > have increased memory on our platform from 4GB to 8GB and therefore have to > increase swap space from 8GB to 16GB. No you don't. It's advised, but not mandatory. > We have enough space in our /var > partition that we could add a swap file there and not have to touch the > existing partition layout. I like the simplicity of the swap file approach, > but we have an application that is very sensitive to I/O performance and > I'm a little wary what this could mean. QA I know would have a field day in > trying to pound the system with all sorts of stress tests. I think a > dedicated swap partition is probably a safer option. Any I/O bound application suffers from any kind of swap. You would do better to first establish how this application suffers once you start swapping. If your machine needs more then or even close to 8GB of swap, I doubt the applications are responsive to begin with. With 8GB of memory, it's probably better to have 2GB of swap, so that offending applications are killed off sooner and the machine is able to recover sooner. But - I'm assuming this is a server, for a multimedia machine - editing large images or videos - more swap is beneficial as inactive images/videos can be swapped out. -- Mel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Using mdconfig for swap space
Thanks for the responses. The reason I'm looking at doing this is that we have increased memory on our platform from 4GB to 8GB and therefore have to increase swap space from 8GB to 16GB. We have enough space in our /var partition that we could add a swap file there and not have to touch the existing partition layout. I like the simplicity of the swap file approach, but we have an application that is very sensitive to I/O performance and I'm a little wary what this could mean. QA I know would have a field day in trying to pound the system with all sorts of stress tests. I think a dedicated swap partition is probably a safer option. Peter -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Bye Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:57 AM To: 'freebsd-questions@freebsd.org' Subject: Re: Using mdconfig for swap space On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk for > > swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For example, I > > could do something like this: > > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to swap. > That is self defeating. > > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition on the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has already pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. Dan -- Daniel Bye _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) - against HTML, vCards and X - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > > > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk for > > swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For example, I > > could do something like this: > > Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to > me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for > processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to swap. > That is self defeating. > > In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. > If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. He's talking about using a swap file, rather than a dedicated partition on the disk, not in RAM! Although it is slightly slower, as Chuck has already pointed out, it might, in certain circumstances, be a somewhat more convenient solution than repartitioning/reinstalling the whole system. And as RW has said, the facility already exists and can be enabled with a couple of knobs in /etc/rc.conf. Dan -- Daniel Bye _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) - against HTML, vCards and X - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ pgpMvbL6kGGlc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:51:20 -0500 Peter Steele wrote: > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual > disk for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? > For example, I could do something like this: > > mdconfig -a -t swap -f /var/swap0 -s 4g > swapon -a /dev/md0 FWIW that's already supported by adding swapfile="/var/swap0" to rc.conf Your arguments are wrong BTW "-t swap" creates a device *backed* by swap. And the size comes from the size of the supplied file - which you typically create with dd. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:20PM -0500, Peter Steele wrote: > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk for > swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For example, I > could do something like this: Unless I am missing something basic here, it seems like a bad idea to me - to carve out and use up some memory to use as extra storage for processes that need more memory that you have taken away to give to swap. That is self defeating. In addition, one use of swap is to write dumps to if there is a crash. If you put it in memory, it is gone when you reboot. jerry > > mdconfig -a -t swap -f /var/swap0 -s 4g > swapon -a /dev/md0 > > to add 4G to the system swap space backed by the file /var/swap0. How would > this compare to repartitioning my hard drive and adding a new 4GB swap > partition? > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Peter Steele wrote: > Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk for > swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For example, I > could do something like this: > > mdconfig -a -t swap -f /var/swap0 -s 4g > swapon -a /dev/md0 > > to add 4G to the system swap space backed by the file /var/swap0. How would > this compare to repartitioning my hard drive and adding a new 4GB swap > partition? > > In general, this is not a good idea. Your system will ideally not use swap space at all, and if it's using it a lot then it could sure use the extra ram consumed by the md drive instead of in swap. Most likely to slow your system down, not speed it up. If you're going to do anything, it's best to keep swap on a separate disk, or on the outer part of disk. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
Hi, Peter-- On Sep 8, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Peter Steele wrote: Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For example, I could do something like this: mdconfig -a -t swap -f /var/swap0 -s 4g swapon -a /dev/md0 to add 4G to the system swap space backed by the file /var/swap0. How would this compare to repartitioning my hard drive and adding a new 4GB swap partition? First, using -f means using -t vnode. Secondly, swapping directly to a swap partition is mildly faster than having to navigate through the filesystem layers to do swapfile based swapping. Other platforms have chosen to go with the dynamically created and deleted swapfiles (under /var/vm/swapfile0, 1, etc for example) to allow the system to adjust the amount of disk used for swapspace dynamically. With disk space costing a matter of a few cents per gigabyte nowadays, setting up a dedicated swap partition and just letting it do it's thing is much easier than trying to fiddle around with alternatives, IMHO, but you're welcome to experiment and see whether you end up with something which is actually better for your circumstances Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Using mdconfig for swap space
Are there any advantages to using mdconfig and creating a virtual disk for swap space as opposed to having a designated swap partition? For example, I could do something like this: mdconfig -a -t swap -f /var/swap0 -s 4g swapon -a /dev/md0 to add 4G to the system swap space backed by the file /var/swap0. How would this compare to repartitioning my hard drive and adding a new 4GB swap partition? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Should swap space be mirrored via geom?
> If you don't mirror swap space, and a drive goes out, you're almost > certain to experience a kernel panic and not just application failures > in userland. Unless you have an urgent need for lots of swap space > available, it's much better from the standpoint of system reliability > to mirror swap also. That's what we assumed might be the danger. It's pretty obvious when you think about it ultimately and I'm curious why anyone would have suggested not to mirror the swap partition. Thanks for the reply. Peter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Should swap space be mirrored via geom?
On Jan 14, 2009, at 8:04 AM, Peter Steele wrote: We have been debating whether or we should mirror the swap partitions as well. I set it up not mirrored based on some articles I read on the net, but we're concerned what might happen to a system if a drive died at a time when the its swap partition contained active pages. My first reaction would be that the applications bound to these pages would crash, something that would not happen if we used swap mirroring. If you don't mirror swap space, and a drive goes out, you're almost certain to experience a kernel panic and not just application failures in userland. Unless you have an urgent need for lots of swap space available, it's much better from the standpoint of system reliability to mirror swap also. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Should swap space be mirrored via geom?
We have systems setup using geom based mirroring where the drives are partitioned into three slices, one for the OS, one for the swap partition, and one for our application data. We have four hot-swappable SATA drives per system. At present we only have the OS slice mirrored with geom, and our own data partition is definitely not a candidate for mirroring. The swap slice is not mirrored, so we end up with 4x4GB of space on each system (which is probably way more than we need). We have been debating whether or we should mirror the swap partitions as well. I set it up not mirrored based on some articles I read on the net, but we're concerned what might happen to a system if a drive died at a time when the its swap partition contained active pages. My first reaction would be that the applications bound to these pages would crash, something that would not happen if we used swap mirroring. Can anyone shed some light on this? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: SNMPD Consuming Swap Space
"Davenport, Steve M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello, > > I am running snmpd 5.4.1.2 built from a port on 7-Release, hardware is > Sun V100, 512Mb total memory, 381Mb free. The daemon starts fine. When a > snmpwalk is done from another system all is well until the interface > table and then I see: > > interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifSpeed.1 : Gauge32: 1000 > interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifSpeed.2 : Gauge32: 0 > interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifSpeed.3 : Gauge32: 0 > snmpwalk: No response arrived before timeout. > > After the timeout happens, looking at "swapinfo -k" shows that swap > space is continually consumed until empty at which point the snmpd > daemon is stopped: > > fbsdh# swap_pager: out of swap space > swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed > Nov 25 11:44:08 fbsdh kernel: pid 84674 (snmpd), uid 0, was killed: out > of swap space > > Now the swap space is freeded: > fbsdh# swapinfo -k > Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity > /dev/ad0b 209916026456 2072704 1% > > Has anyone seen this issue or know of a solution. Since you're running the SNMP daemon from a port, not the one from the base system, you may need developers' assistance for this sort of bug. Problems like this are often caused by wraparound bugs or infinite loops in my experience, although there are lots of other possibilities. If you can get a stack traceback when it crashes, that will is quite likely to give a solid clue. -- Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
SNMPD Consuming Swap Space
Hello, I am running snmpd 5.4.1.2 built from a port on 7-Release, hardware is Sun V100, 512Mb total memory, 381Mb free. The daemon starts fine. When a snmpwalk is done from another system all is well until the interface table and then I see: interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifSpeed.1 : Gauge32: 1000 interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifSpeed.2 : Gauge32: 0 interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifSpeed.3 : Gauge32: 0 snmpwalk: No response arrived before timeout. After the timeout happens, looking at "swapinfo -k" shows that swap space is continually consumed until empty at which point the snmpd daemon is stopped: fbsdh# swap_pager: out of swap space swap_pager_getswapspace(16): failed Nov 25 11:44:08 fbsdh kernel: pid 84674 (snmpd), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space Now the swap space is freeded: fbsdh# swapinfo -k Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity /dev/ad0b 209916026456 2072704 1% Has anyone seen this issue or know of a solution. Thanks for your assistance, Steve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Real Memory and Swap Space.
In the last episode (Nov 08), Grant Peel said: > I have two older servers that started with 512 MB of RAM. > > I want to install two GIGs of RAM. > > My swap space is set at 1 GB. > > Whan I upgrade to two GB RAM, do I have to increase the swap slice? Probably not, but it depends on your workload. If you never ran out of swap with 512MB, you probably won't with 2GB either. You'll also want to enable mini crashdumps (add "debug.minidump=1" to /etc/sysctl.conf), since if the system panics, it won't be able to dump 2GB of RAM into 1GB of swap :) -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Real Memory and Swap Space.
Hi all, I have two older servers that started with 512 MB of RAM. I want to install two GIGs of RAM. My swap space is set at 1 GB. Whan I upgrade to two GB RAM, do I have to increase the swap slice? -GRant ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Running out of swap space????
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 09:13:22 -0500 Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > >>> -- Original message -- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> +pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space > >>> +swap_pager: out of swap space > >>> +swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed > >> > >> If you kill mysql server, does the swap space free up? Are there any known > >> issues between the version of MySQL that you're running and FreeBSD 6.0? > > > > MySQL not having a properly tuned config file for the system it runs on? > > It is > > known to consume vast amounts of resources if not properly configured... > > > I wrote a one line shell script that runs swapinfo -h and cron'd it to > run once an hour. Each hour the amount of swap space being used has > increased by 100 to 200 MB. Eventually swap is exhausted and the system > kills a binary. (It's not just mysql. Other things are being killed as > well.) This is typical. I believe that the process killed is the one swapped out the longest, or maybe it's random? Either way, the one killed usually isn't the one using all the memory. > What would cause swap to increase steadily like that? Something not > releasing swap when it's no longer needed? One of two things: 1) You have misconfigured an application to think it has _way_ more memory available than it does, so it just keeps using more and more memory, because you told it that it was OK to do so. 2) You are running an application with a memory leak. Meaning: it allocates memory, then loses track of said allocation and re-allocates it later. Since it lost track, it's no longer using the memory, but can't tell the kernel to release the memory for other applications to use either. This is a bug in the application, not FreeBSD. If you provide the full output of top to the list, I'm sure some problem will jump out for someone on the list. Wait till the system is close to having no swap, then do "top > somefile" and paste the file into your mailer. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Running out of swap space????
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -- Original message -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] +pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space +swap_pager: out of swap space +swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed If you kill mysql server, does the swap space free up? Are there any known issues between the version of MySQL that you're running and FreeBSD 6.0? MySQL not having a properly tuned config file for the system it runs on? It is known to consume vast amounts of resources if not properly configured... I wrote a one line shell script that runs swapinfo -h and cron'd it to run once an hour. Each hour the amount of swap space being used has increased by 100 to 200 MB. Eventually swap is exhausted and the system kills a binary. (It's not just mysql. Other things are being killed as well.) What would cause swap to increase steadily like that? Something not releasing swap when it's no longer needed? -- Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Running out of swap space????
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > -- Original message -- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >+pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space > >+swap_pager: out of swap space > >+swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed > > > If you kill mysql server, does the swap space free up? Are there any known > issues between the version of MySQL that you're running and FreeBSD 6.0? MySQL not having a properly tuned config file for the system it runs on? It is known to consume vast amounts of resources if not properly configured... Just a thought ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Running out of swap space????
> -- Original message -- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >+pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space >+swap_pager: out of swap space >+swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed If you kill mysql server, does the swap space free up? Are there any known issues between the version of MySQL that you're running and FreeBSD 6.0? Just some thoughts, Bob --- Begin Message --- I've got a server that is running out of swap space: +pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space +swap_pager: out of swap space +swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed The strange this is, this server has a 6GB swap partition! swapinfo -h Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity /dev/da0s1b 6291456 2.6G 6.0G43% This isn't exactly a resource-starved machine either: CPU: AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 244 (1793.88-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin = "AuthenticAMD" Id = 0xf5a Stepping = 10 Features=0x78bfbff AMD Features=0xe0500800 real memory = 2146893824 (2047 MB) avail memory = 2065797120 (1970 MB) ACPI APIC Table: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 FreeBSD hostname.utdallas.edu 6.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #0: Thu Mar 30 19:25:18 CST 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMPKERNEL amd64 last pid: 52327; load averages: 0.45, 0.46, 0.45 up 11+03:42:04 03:32:15 63 processes: 1 running, 62 sleeping CPU states: 5.3% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 3.9% interrupt, 90.1% idle Mem: 1410M Active, 126M Inact, 190M Wired, 82M Cache, 214M Buf, 78M Free Swap: 6144M Total, 2687M Used, 3457M Free, 43% Inuse Any suggestions are welcome - what could cause this? How to troubleshoot? Possible solutions/workarounds? Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ --- End Message --- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Running out of swap space????
In the last episode (Jun 05), [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > I've got a server that is running out of swap space: > > +pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space > +swap_pager: out of swap space > +swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed > > The strange this is, this server has a 6GB swap partition! > > swapinfo -h > Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity > /dev/da0s1b 6291456 2.6G 6.0G43% > > This isn't exactly a resource-starved machine either: > > real memory = 2146893824 (2047 MB) > avail memory = 2065797120 (1970 MB) > > last pid: 52327; load averages: 0.45, 0.46, 0.45 > up 11+03:42:04 03:32:15 > 63 processes: 1 running, 62 sleeping > CPU states: 5.3% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 3.9% interrupt, 90.1% idle > Mem: 1410M Active, 126M Inact, 190M Wired, 82M Cache, 214M Buf, 78M Free > Swap: 6144M Total, 2687M Used, 3457M Free, 43% Inuse Seems sort of starved to me; 2GB of RAM yet you have enough processes active to have allocated all of that plus 2.6GB of swap! I wouldn't be surprised if occasionally you allocated another 3GB, which would max out your swap space. With only 120 processes total, you can probably just run top sorted by size (top -o size, or enter "osize" when it's running) and look for large ones. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Running out of swap space????
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: I've got a server that is running out of swap space: +pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space +swap_pager: out of swap space +swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed The strange this is, this server has a 6GB swap partition! swapinfo -h Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity /dev/da0s1b 6291456 2.6G 6.0G43% This isn't exactly a resource-starved machine either: CPU: AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 244 (1793.88-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin = "AuthenticAMD" Id = 0xf5a Stepping = 10 Features=0x78bfbff SE,SSE2> AMD Features=0xe0500800 real memory = 2146893824 (2047 MB) avail memory = 2065797120 (1970 MB) ACPI APIC Table: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 FreeBSD hostname.utdallas.edu 6.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #0: Thu Mar 30 19:25:18 CST 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMPKERNEL amd64 last pid: 52327; load averages: 0.45, 0.46, 0.45 up 11+03:42:04 03:32:15 63 processes: 1 running, 62 sleeping CPU states: 5.3% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 3.9% interrupt, 90.1% idle Mem: 1410M Active, 126M Inact, 190M Wired, 82M Cache, 214M Buf, 78M Free Swap: 6144M Total, 2687M Used, 3457M Free, 43% Inuse Any suggestions are welcome - what could cause this? ps aux | sort -n +5 The latter processes need most memory. How to troubleshoot? This may be normal behaviour. It depends on the processes. Possible solutions/workarounds? It depends also. Possible solutions are: Add more RAM, add swap (see [1]) or run less processes. [1] http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/adding-swap-space.html Regards Björn ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Running out of swap space????
I've got a server that is running out of swap space: +pid 37308 (mysqld), uid 88, was killed: out of swap space +swap_pager: out of swap space +swap_pager_getswapspace(1): failed The strange this is, this server has a 6GB swap partition! swapinfo -h Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity /dev/da0s1b 6291456 2.6G 6.0G43% This isn't exactly a resource-starved machine either: CPU: AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 244 (1793.88-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin = "AuthenticAMD" Id = 0xf5a Stepping = 10 Features=0x78bfbff AMD Features=0xe0500800 real memory = 2146893824 (2047 MB) avail memory = 2065797120 (1970 MB) ACPI APIC Table: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 FreeBSD hostname.utdallas.edu 6.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #0: Thu Mar 30 19:25:18 CST 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMPKERNEL amd64 last pid: 52327; load averages: 0.45, 0.46, 0.45 up 11+03:42:04 03:32:15 63 processes: 1 running, 62 sleeping CPU states: 5.3% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 3.9% interrupt, 90.1% idle Mem: 1410M Active, 126M Inact, 190M Wired, 82M Cache, 214M Buf, 78M Free Swap: 6144M Total, 2687M Used, 3457M Free, 43% Inuse Any suggestions are welcome - what could cause this? How to troubleshoot? Possible solutions/workarounds? Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 02:50:10PM +0700, Roger Merritt wrote: > OK, my problem doesn't seem to be exactly the same. My machine hangs, and > when I check it the console screen is filled with the message, "swap-pager: > indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 26650, size: 4096" and at that > point the only thing I can do is a hard reboot -- it's not reacting to > input at all. You probably have a failing HD. Back up and replace before the damage becomes worse and you lose data. > My /etc/make.conf in its entirety is > > # added by use.perl 2006-01-18 08:04:37 > PERL_VER=5.8.7 > PERL_VERSION=5.8.7 > > I was surprised to find there is no /etc/defaults/make.conf any more -- > that may have something to do with it. I haven't been paying very close > attention until now. Nope, it's in /usr/share/examples/etc/make.conf now. The file is entirely commented out so it was a NOP to have it in /etc/defaults. Kris pgpU5uVEvSu7w.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
At 12:55 AM 1/18/2006 -0500, you wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 06:54:39AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 04:25:57AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > >>Hi! > >> > >>OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running > >>6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 > >> > >>When I start a > >> > >> # portupgrade -a > >> > >>up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: > >> > >> make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily > >> unavailable > >> > >>and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else > >>seen this? > > > >You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment > >that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or > >some other USE_*. > That could be a hint. I can find legal options in > /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk > can I ? Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific port makefiles (like USE_*). Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. Kris OK, my problem doesn't seem to be exactly the same. My machine hangs, and when I check it the console screen is filled with the message, "swap-pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 26650, size: 4096" and at that point the only thing I can do is a hard reboot -- it's not reacting to input at all. My /etc/make.conf in its entirety is # added by use.perl 2006-01-18 08:04:37 PERL_VER=5.8.7 PERL_VERSION=5.8.7 I was surprised to find there is no /etc/defaults/make.conf any more -- that may have something to do with it. I haven't been paying very close attention until now. -- Roger ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 08:12:49AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:51:12AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > >>On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> > >>>On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:17:32AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >>> > >>>You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment > >>>that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or > >>>some other USE_*. > >>That could be a hint. I can find legal options in > >>/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk > >>can I ? > > > >Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific > >port makefiles (like USE_*). > > > >Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. > This is it: > > X_WINDOW_SYSTEM= xorg > > CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes > NO_LPR=yes > > # WITH_FAM= yes > USE_FAM=yes > >>> > >>>As I said, USE_* are illegal here and cause recursion. > >>> > >>>Kris > >>> > >>Thanks, I'll ask freebsd-gnome about that. > > > >What's to ask? They'll tell you the same thing I did. > It seems, they are substituting fam by gamin for gnome 2.14 . > Obviously I gathered the wrong make.conf settings for that from > some mail archieve. Since they are nice and patient people, they > will probably give me the right ones :-) Surely WITH_FAM is what you meant. Kris pgpSRnTqGDTJv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:51:12AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:17:32AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or some other USE_*. That could be a hint. I can find legal options in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk can I ? Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific port makefiles (like USE_*). Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. This is it: X_WINDOW_SYSTEM= xorg CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes NO_LPR=yes # WITH_FAM= yes USE_FAM=yes As I said, USE_* are illegal here and cause recursion. Kris Thanks, I'll ask freebsd-gnome about that. What's to ask? They'll tell you the same thing I did. It seems, they are substituting fam by gamin for gnome 2.14 . Obviously I gathered the wrong make.conf settings for that from some mail archieve. Since they are nice and patient people, they will probably give me the right ones :-) Uli. Kris * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:51:12AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:17:32AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > >>On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> > > > >You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment > >that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or > >some other USE_*. > That could be a hint. I can find legal options in > /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk > can I ? > >>> > >>>Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific > >>>port makefiles (like USE_*). > >>> > >>>Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. > >>This is it: > >> > >>X_WINDOW_SYSTEM= xorg > >> > >>CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes > >>NO_LPR=yes > >> > >># WITH_FAM= yes > >>USE_FAM=yes > > > >As I said, USE_* are illegal here and cause recursion. > > > >Kris > > > Thanks, I'll ask freebsd-gnome about that. What's to ask? They'll tell you the same thing I did. Kris pgpshDy5XY0Mk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:17:32AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or some other USE_*. That could be a hint. I can find legal options in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk can I ? Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific port makefiles (like USE_*). Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. This is it: X_WINDOW_SYSTEM= xorg CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes NO_LPR=yes # WITH_FAM= yes USE_FAM=yes As I said, USE_* are illegal here and cause recursion. Kris Thanks, I'll ask freebsd-gnome about that. Uli. * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:17:32AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >>> > >>>You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment > >>>that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or > >>>some other USE_*. > >>That could be a hint. I can find legal options in > >> /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk > >>can I ? > > > >Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific > >port makefiles (like USE_*). > > > >Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. > This is it: > > X_WINDOW_SYSTEM= xorg > > CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes > NO_LPR=yes > > # WITH_FAM= yes > USE_FAM=yes As I said, USE_* are illegal here and cause recursion. Kris pgpKzQOsrutKw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or some other USE_*. That could be a hint. I can find legal options in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk can I ? Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific port makefiles (like USE_*). Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. This is it: X_WINDOW_SYSTEM= xorg CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes NO_LPR=yes # WITH_FAM= yes USE_FAM=yes WITH_LAME= yes WITH_APACHE2= yes OVERRIDE_LINUX_BASE_PORT=rh-9 # added by use.perl 2005-12-26 20:43:23 PERL_VER=5.8.7 PERL_VERSION=5.8.7 --- Uli. Kris * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 06:54:39AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 04:25:57AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > >>Hi! > >> > >>OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running > >>6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 > >> > >>When I start a > >> > >> # portupgrade -a > >> > >>up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: > >> > >> make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily > >> unavailable > >> > >>and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else > >>seen this? > > > >You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment > >that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or > >some other USE_*. > That could be a hint. I can find legal options in > /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk > can I ? Sort of..but it also lists options that are only legal within specific port makefiles (like USE_*). Post your make.conf and I'll probably be able to tell you what's wrong. Kris pgpCsJsk22BHb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 04:25:57AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi! OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 When I start a # portupgrade -a up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily unavailable and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else seen this? You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or some other USE_*. That could be a hint. I can find legal options in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk can I ? Uli. Kris * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 04:25:57AM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: > Hi! > > OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running > 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 > > When I start a > > # portupgrade -a > > up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: > > make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily > unavailable > > and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else > seen this? You are setting an illegal variable in your make.conf or environment that is causing the port makefile to recurse. Probably USE_GCC or some other USE_*. Kris pgpbTESpaKQBm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Roger Merritt wrote: At 04:25 AM 1/18/2006 +0100, you wrote: Hi! OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 When I start a # portupgrade -a up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily unavailable and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else seen this? Yes. I'm running FreeBSD 6.0 on a PII 300MHz with 64MB RAM and a 40GB hard drive. It works great until I run portupgrade on mysql-server. Then it runs out of swap space and I get console error messages and have to reboot. I haven't dug into it yet, but several months ago I redirected the swap file to a different location to increase the size. I'll have to do some research to find out exactly what I did and how much space I gave it and how to increase it. I haven't had time yet to do it. Don't know why building mysql-* (and possibly some others) takes so much swap space. I first encountered it running portmanager -u and didn't realize for a couple of days (and four or five freeze-ups) what was happening. This really has become more dramatic: Usually - when I run a portupgrade - about half of my RAM is used and I can still work on my Gnome desktop without any swapping or serious performance losses. Now every port produces this Max recursion message and applications become unusable. Uli. * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: portupgrade eats my swap space
At 04:25 AM 1/18/2006 +0100, you wrote: Hi! OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 When I start a # portupgrade -a up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily unavailable and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else seen this? Yes. I'm running FreeBSD 6.0 on a PII 300MHz with 64MB RAM and a 40GB hard drive. It works great until I run portupgrade on mysql-server. Then it runs out of swap space and I get console error messages and have to reboot. I haven't dug into it yet, but several months ago I redirected the swap file to a different location to increase the size. I'll have to do some research to find out exactly what I did and how much space I gave it and how to increase it. I haven't had time yet to do it. Don't know why building mysql-* (and possibly some others) takes so much swap space. I first encountered it running portmanager -u and didn't realize for a couple of days (and four or five freeze-ups) what was happening. -- Roger ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
portupgrade eats my swap space
Hi! OK, this is an old PIII 1 GHZ , 500 MB RAM running 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Sun Jan 15 05:56:00 CET 2006 When I start a # portupgrade -a up to 671 MB swap are used and I see this message: make: Max recursion level (500) exceeded.: Resource temporarily unavailable and of course everything becomes really slow. Has anybody else seen this? Regards, Uli. * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
Lowell Gilbert writes: > The basic advice is quite sound, so I'll reiterate it: Provide > what you think you might ever need. Let me get behind Lowell on this bit. The box I am typing on has 512 mb memory; because that may get bumped to 1 Gb it has 2 Gb swap split over two disks. > If in doubt, err on the side of caution. In the current paradigm, disk space is dirt cheap - ~$0.60/Gb at the first place I could find in my bookmarks. If "out of memory" or performance problems affect mission-critical work, then you need to gum the bullet and get more disk space. One man's opinion, Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 11/1/05, Ian Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation > > proposes to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't > > think 12 gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to > > put 4 gigs of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) > > > > That's the original reason for the suggestion. You need more than > twice the amount of RAM if you need to capture a dump for debugging. > If you won't ever be doing that, you may not need so much swap. Not quite: >From dumpon(8) on 5-STABLE: For most systems the size of the specified dump device must be at least the size of physical memory. Even though an additional header is added to the dump, the BIOS for a platform typically holds back some memory, so it is not usually necessary to size the dump device larger than the actual amount of RAM available in the machine. > My experience is that if you have much more than twice the RAM size > swapped out, things start to get so sluggish that it is better to find > a way to reduce your memory requirement or provide more physical > memory. Of course, that is characteristic of MY usage and may not > apply at all to your usage, but it may be the reason that 3xRAM is the > upper limit of what is routinely recommended. Interactive single-user use will probably act like that nearly all the time. High page fault rates will always slow the system down. It's not necessary the case that a system will maintain high paging rates when it's gone deep into swap, but the exceptions are rather special cases. > > What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? > > Provide what you think you will need. It depends on what you expect > to be doing with your memory. A busy mail server that will be using > huge amounts of temporary storage to manipulate the messages may not > need a lot of swap, simply because you might prefer to throttle > incoming mail when the system gets heavily loaded rather than get deep > into swap and slow the system down. That's an interesting example, but it's still just an example; it won't necessarily apply to all mail servers, especially configurations that use a lot of short-lived files. The basic advice is quite sound, so I'll reiterate it: Provide what you think you might ever need. If in doubt, err on the side of caution. > I configured my new 4GB servers with 4GB of swap. That's more than I > expect to ever need, but I have oodles of disk space. If you have > multiple drives, you may want to spread that out among the drives for > more efficiency (but to do a dump you need enough contiguous space on > one drive). For ordinary desktop or server use, I think it's always a good idea to have enough swap for a kernel dump. It's cheap insurance. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
> > Hi, > > I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation > proposes to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't > think 12 gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to > put 4 gigs of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) > > What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? Swap space gets used for at least three things, swapping, paging and kernel crash dump space.If you are not concerned about dump space, then the rest of the decision depends a lot on the size and number of processes you expect to be running at any given time. Generally, for smaller memory sizes, swap space, via paging gives you a larger virtual space to run in. But, it looks like you may by trying to make it so everything gets to stay in memory and never have any of it paged out, much less swapped out. For our systems that have plenty of memory, I tend to use about 1 1/2 times memory for the size of swap - plenty of memory meaning as much as it can address or at least more than enough to cover all simultaneous processes. Remember that a lot of utilities and daemons fork off new processes for each incident they encounter rather than queueing stuff for the main process to handle. They sort of use it for poor mans queueing. jerry > > Thanks > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
On 11/1/05, Ian Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation > proposes to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't > think 12 gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to > put 4 gigs of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) > That's the original reason for the suggestion. You need more than twice the amount of RAM if you need to capture a dump for debugging. If you won't ever be doing that, you may not need so much swap. My experience is that if you have much more than twice the RAM size swapped out, things start to get so sluggish that it is better to find a way to reduce your memory requirement or provide more physical memory. Of course, that is characteristic of MY usage and may not apply at all to your usage, but it may be the reason that 3xRAM is the upper limit of what is routinely recommended. > What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? Provide what you think you will need. It depends on what you expect to be doing with your memory. A busy mail server that will be using huge amounts of temporary storage to manipulate the messages may not need a lot of swap, simply because you might prefer to throttle incoming mail when the system gets heavily loaded rather than get deep into swap and slow the system down. I configured my new 4GB servers with 4GB of swap. That's more than I expect to ever need, but I have oodles of disk space. If you have multiple drives, you may want to spread that out among the drives for more efficiency (but to do a dump you need enough contiguous space on one drive). - Bob ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
Ian Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation proposes > to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't think 12 > gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to put 4 gigs > of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) > > What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? It depends on the system usage. You don't *need* any swap at all. I would advise more swap space than RAM, though, to make sure you can do a kernel dump. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
At 07:13 AM 11/1/2005, Vladimir Tsvetkov wrote: > Hi, > > I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation > proposes to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't > think 12 gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to > put 4 gigs of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) > > What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? It depends on how big is the address space for your machines. 32-bit machines can address 4GB of memory, so it's reasonable to use 2 or 3 times the amount of RAM space (if you hawe 256MB or 512MB - the swap should be 768MB or 1GB), but if you have 32bit machines with 4GB of memory there is no need to use more than 4GB for swap. That's not entirely true. Each process gets a 4GB (virtual) address space to operate in. With default settings, 1GB of that space is used for the kernel, and the remaining 3GB is available for the process to use. If you have several processes that require close to their 3GB limit, they could quite easily consume 4GB of swap, and more. -Glenn 64-bit machines can address 2^64 bytes which is a very big address space, so you should use the guidelines in the documentation (FreeBSD Handbook). Best regards, Vladimir ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Swap space
> Hi, > > I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation > proposes to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't > think 12 gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to > put 4 gigs of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) > > What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? It depends on how big is the address space for your machines. 32-bit machines can address 4GB of memory, so it's reasonable to use 2 or 3 times the amount of RAM space (if you hawe 256MB or 512MB - the swap should be 768MB or 1GB), but if you have 32bit machines with 4GB of memory there is no need to use more than 4GB for swap. 64-bit machines can address 2^64 bytes which is a very big address space, so you should use the guidelines in the documentation (FreeBSD Handbook). Best regards, Vladimir ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Swap space
Hi, I just bought 4 servers with 4 gigs of ram, the documentation proposes to use 2 to 3 times the amount of ram for swap... I don't think 12 gigs of swap would be useful lol, but do I really need to put 4 gigs of ram. (It might be useful for kernel dump but...) What do you guys do with swap space in this scenario ? Thanks ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Can a process be made immune to out-of-swap-space kills?
On 2005-10-30 00:21, Doug Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 01:59:53AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > On 2005-10-29 16:34, Doug Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Sometimes, I accidentally run something that eats up too much > > > memory and causes the pager to run out of swap space and start > > > shooting down processes to rectify the situation. Sometimes, > > > the process chosen for demolition happens to be `screen.' > > > Since this process sorta manages a whole lot of others and, on > > > being zapped out of existence, leaves many of them running but > > > inaccessible, I find this choice decidedly inconvenient. > > > > > > Is there a way for me to force FreeBSD to leave `screen' (or > > > any other process) alone when selecting something to kill to > > > free memory? > > > > Hmmm, why are user limits not applied? Wouldn't it be a nicer > > way to solve the "rogue process" problems? > > It turns out that the problem is not actually a memory request but a > huge temp file in an MFS filesystem... so maybe I need to figure out > how to limit the size of a mount_mfs so it can't blast processes out > of existence. Ah! That explains why this wasn't caught by the user limits :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Can a process be made immune to out-of-swap-space kills?
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 01:59:53AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2005-10-29 16:34, Doug Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sometimes, I accidentally run something that eats up too much > > memory and causes the pager to run out of swap space and start > > shooting down processes to rectify the situation. Sometimes, > > the process chosen for demolition happens to be `screen.' > > Since this process sorta manages a whole lot of others and, on > > being zapped out of existence, leaves many of them running but > > inaccessible, I find this choice decidedly inconvenient. > > > > Is there a way for me to force FreeBSD to leave `screen' (or > > any other process) alone when selecting something to kill to > > free memory? > > Hmmm, why are user limits not applied? Wouldn't it be a nicer > way to solve the "rogue process" problems? It turns out that the problem is not actually a memory request but a huge temp file in an MFS filesystem... so maybe I need to figure out how to limit the size of a mount_mfs so it can't blast processes out of existence. For the curious, I had tried a "sox ... reverse" operation, which reverses a wav file (and apparently does it by making a temporary copy rather than reading it backward, which I didn't know!), and the file in question was a wav about 240 megabytes long. This is a small home FreeBSD box and almost never hosts any user but me. My /tmp, a mount_mfs, is about 150 meg in size, according to `df.' The `sox' command ate that up so fast that the sheer volume of swap failure messages prevented me from acting quickly enough, and the pager shot down a whole bunch of processes trying to save the world. The list of shot processes happened to include `screen,' and this created a number of orphans that I had to kill subsequently myself, such as a stranded `ssh' session to another machine. So yes, I could stand for some tuning. On a multi-user system, this would be a most unwise way to leave things. -- Doug Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.dlee.org SSB + BART Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bartsite.com "I before E, except after C, or when sounded like A, as in neighbor and weigh, except for when weird foreign concierges seize neither leisure nor science from the height of society." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Can a process be made immune to out-of-swap-space kills?
On 2005-10-29 16:34, Doug Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sometimes, I accidentally run something that eats up too much > memory and causes the pager to run out of swap space and start > shooting down processes to rectify the situation. Sometimes, > the process chosen for demolition happens to be `screen.' > Since this process sorta manages a whole lot of others and, on > being zapped out of existence, leaves many of them running but > inaccessible, I find this choice decidedly inconvenient. > > Is there a way for me to force FreeBSD to leave `screen' (or > any other process) alone when selecting something to kill to > free memory? Hmmm, why are user limits not applied? Wouldn't it be a nicer way to solve the "rogue process" problems? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Can a process be made immune to out-of-swap-space kills?
On 10/30/05, Doug Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sometimes, I accidentally run something that eats up too much memory > and causes the pager to run out of swap space and start shooting down > processes to rectify the situation. Sometimes, the process chosen for > demolition happens to be `screen.' Since this process sorta manages a > whole lot of others and, on being zapped out of existence, leaves many > of them running but inaccessible, I find this choice decidedly > inconvenient. > > Is there a way for me to force FreeBSD to leave `screen' (or any other > process) alone when selecting something to kill to free memory? > > Please Cc me any answers. > > Thanks much. > > > -- > Doug Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.dlee.org > SSB + BART Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bartsite.com > "Is your cucumber bitter? Throw it away. Are there briars in your > path? Turn aside. That is enough. Do not go on to say, `Why were > things of this sort ever brought into the world?'" > --Marcus Aurelius > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > I don't know how to do that, but by all means you shouldn't allow that to happen. It's not windoze, where everything is meant to be swapped. Read limits(1) manpage to know how to prevent a user from messing with other processes in such an unfriendly way. Last time I ran into a problem alike was upgrading from fedora core 3 to FC4. Yum requested about 4000GB (4 Terabytes) of RAM. The machine became inaccessible (as in "showing no signs of life whatsoever") for 5 hours, but in the end something coredumped and I could login :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Can a process be made immune to out-of-swap-space kills?
Sometimes, I accidentally run something that eats up too much memory and causes the pager to run out of swap space and start shooting down processes to rectify the situation. Sometimes, the process chosen for demolition happens to be `screen.' Since this process sorta manages a whole lot of others and, on being zapped out of existence, leaves many of them running but inaccessible, I find this choice decidedly inconvenient. Is there a way for me to force FreeBSD to leave `screen' (or any other process) alone when selecting something to kill to free memory? Please Cc me any answers. Thanks much. -- Doug Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.dlee.org SSB + BART Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bartsite.com "Is your cucumber bitter? Throw it away. Are there briars in your path? Turn aside. That is enough. Do not go on to say, `Why were things of this sort ever brought into the world?'" --Marcus Aurelius ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap space problems
At 01:20 PM 5/9/2005, Chris Fedde wrote: Occasionaly my system hangs for a few seconds while loading a process from swap that has been idle for some time. ad0: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA retrying (2 retries left) LBA=161663 What type of driver interface and controller is this? And what FBSD version? I used to get this error when I was trying to get a SATA drive working last summer. There were bugs in the ata driver (circa 5.2.1) that are about 96% fixed in 5.3. It would happen under heavy disk IO doing a lot of random seeks. The hang really is a hang, not just a delay from the swapping activity. 40 or 50% of the time, it resulted in a "hard" full system hang (ie: had to power cycle or hit the reset button.) Often there was severe data corruption, also. -Wayne ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap space problems
On Mon, 09 May 2005 11:20:17 -0600 Chris Fedde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Occasionaly my system hangs for a few seconds while loading a process > from swap that has been idle for some time. It could be that I'm > actualy out of swap space in these conditions, because I see this frequently > in dmesg output: > > swap_pager_getswapspace(8): failed. > > But I also see other failures that indicate that there may be a > hardware issue going on: > > swap_pager: I/O error - pageout failed; blkno 20114,size 45056, error 0 > ad0: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA retrying (2 retries left) LBA=161663 > ad0: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA timed out > > Boot message for the device controller is: > > atapci0: port > 0xfc00-0xfc0f,0x376,0x170-0x177,0x3f6,0x1f0-0x1f7 at device 17.1 on pci0 > ata0: channel #0 on atapci0 > ata1: channel #1 on atapci0 > > And the disk is > > ad0: 14648MB [29762/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA66 > > Is there some issue relating to the configuration that I can repair? > Or am I seeing a real hardware problem? Are you by any chance copying from one disk to an other when this happen ? I'm this case I'm getting this kind of errors (not necessarily limited to swap) on VIA8235/8237. -- IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
swap space problems
Occasionaly my system hangs for a few seconds while loading a process from swap that has been idle for some time. It could be that I'm actualy out of swap space in these conditions, because I see this frequently in dmesg output: swap_pager_getswapspace(8): failed. But I also see other failures that indicate that there may be a hardware issue going on: swap_pager: I/O error - pageout failed; blkno 20114,size 45056, error 0 ad0: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA retrying (2 retries left) LBA=161663 ad0: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA timed out Boot message for the device controller is: atapci0: port 0xfc00-0xfc0f,0x376,0x170-0x177,0x3f6,0x1f0-0x1f7 at device 17.1 on pci0 ata0: channel #0 on atapci0 ata1: channel #1 on atapci0 And the disk is ad0: 14648MB [29762/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA66 Is there some issue relating to the configuration that I can repair? Or am I seeing a real hardware problem? -- Chris Fedde ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap space
On May 3, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 03:15:54PM -0600, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: Thanks! Well, on my production system, I am not dumping any kernels. Once It crashes, I reboot it and go back into production. Anything dumped would get wiped out. Luckily I am pretty conservative and only move to new versions of the OS when they have been released a while and so my machines have not had panics in years. It's up to you, of course, but it's been my experience that you might regret the small expenditure of a few gigabytes one day when you do run into a panic you need help to solve... Of course, now that I have mentioned it, my luck will change and something bad will happen. I am not running cheap large IDE disks, but expensive fast high performance U320 disks on RAID controllers and so the extra GB does cost something. If I get a repeating panic, I can boot off a recovery disk and add in extra swap I guess. Thanks I always learn a lot here (I just wish someone could help me with the mail submission question I posted) Chad ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap space
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 03:15:54PM -0600, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: > > On May 3, 2005, at 3:07 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 03:02:11PM -0600, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net > >LLC wrote: > > > >> > >>On May 3, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> > >>>Since it's a pain to add swap later you want to make > >>>allowances for future expansion (e.g. you'd need 32GB of swap if you > >>>ever plan to add 32GB of RAM). > >>> > >> > >>I understand that people recommend as much swap as you have ram or > >>more. However, is this required and why? I have a dual opteron > >>system running i386 5.3-release (with released patches) and it has > >>4GB RAM and only 2GB of swap, which is hardly ever touched, and when > >>it is, just in small amounts. > >> > >>Why is this a problem? (If it ever needs the 2gb of swap I am in > >>trouble as the load at that time would be sky high and the machine > >>not really responsive anyway) > >> > > > >I explained in my email..you need it to dump the kernel. > > > > Thanks! > > Well, on my production system, I am not dumping any kernels. Once It > crashes, I reboot it and go back into production. Anything dumped > would get wiped out. Luckily I am pretty conservative and only move > to new versions of the OS when they have been released a while and so > my machines have not had panics in years. It's up to you, of course, but it's been my experience that you might regret the small expenditure of a few gigabytes one day when you do run into a panic you need help to solve... Kris pgpjW0aET1d7B.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: swap space
On May 3, 2005, at 5:02 PM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: On May 3, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: Since it's a pain to add swap later you want to make allowances for future expansion (e.g. you'd need 32GB of swap if you ever plan to add 32GB of RAM). I understand that people recommend as much swap as you have ram or more. However, is this required and why? I have a dual opteron system running i386 5.3-release (with released patches) and it has 4GB RAM and only 2GB of swap, which is hardly ever touched, and when it is, just in small amounts. It's not required, but the system can't write a panic crash dump out unless there is slightly more swap space available than RAM in the box. If your system doesn't crash, and your workload fits into RAM, having gigabytes of swap space set up is not very useful -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap space
On May 3, 2005, at 3:07 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 03:02:11PM -0600, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: On May 3, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: Since it's a pain to add swap later you want to make allowances for future expansion (e.g. you'd need 32GB of swap if you ever plan to add 32GB of RAM). I understand that people recommend as much swap as you have ram or more. However, is this required and why? I have a dual opteron system running i386 5.3-release (with released patches) and it has 4GB RAM and only 2GB of swap, which is hardly ever touched, and when it is, just in small amounts. Why is this a problem? (If it ever needs the 2gb of swap I am in trouble as the load at that time would be sky high and the machine not really responsive anyway) I explained in my email..you need it to dump the kernel. Thanks! Well, on my production system, I am not dumping any kernels. Once It crashes, I reboot it and go back into production. Anything dumped would get wiped out. Luckily I am pretty conservative and only move to new versions of the OS when they have been released a while and so my machines have not had panics in years. Thanks Chad ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
