On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On 08/27/2012 17:23, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/22/2012 12:09, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> On 8/20/20
On 08/27/2012 17:23, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/22/2012 12:09, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 8/20/2012 8:26 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Gezeala M.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 12:09, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/20/2012 8:26 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II
wrote:
>
>
On 08/22/2012 12:09, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 8/20/2012 8:26 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/18/2012 19:57, Gezeala M. B
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On 8/20/2012 8:26 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/18/2012 19:57, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>
>>>
On 8/20/2012 8:26 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/18/2012 19:57, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/17/2012 17:08, Gezeala M.
On 20/08/2012 17:22, Alan Cox wrote:
> Try setting kern.maxbcache to two billion and adding 50 billion to the
> setting of vm.kmem_size{,_max}.
Just as a side-note: unless it has some side-effects, it is probably
worth increasing these tunables by default, as RAM is very cheap again.
512 GB in a
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> On 08/18/2012 19:57, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/17/2012 17:08, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>
> On
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On 08/18/2012 19:57, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/17/2012 17:08, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> vm.kmem_siz
On 08/18/2012 19:57, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
On 08/17/2012 17:08, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
vm.kmem_size controls the maximum size of the kernel's heap, i.e., the
region where the kernel
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On 08/17/2012 17:08, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> vm.kmem_size controls the maximum size of the kernel's heap, i.e., the
>>> region where the kernel's slab and malloc()-like memory al
On 08/17/2012 17:08, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
vm.kmem_size controls the maximum size of the kernel's heap, i.e., the
region where the kernel's slab and malloc()-like memory allocators obtain
their memory. While this heap may occupy the larges
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> vm.kmem_size controls the maximum size of the kernel's heap, i.e., the
> region where the kernel's slab and malloc()-like memory allocators obtain
> their memory. While this heap may occupy the largest portion of the
> kernel's virtual address sp
vm.kmem_size controls the maximum size of the kernel's heap, i.e., the
region where the kernel's slab and malloc()-like memory allocators
obtain their memory. While this heap may occupy the largest portion of
the kernel's virtual address space, it cannot occupy the entirety of the
address spac
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Andrey Zonov wrote:
>> On 8/17/12 7:15 AM, Marie Bacuno II wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 16, 2012, at 18:47, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>>
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Garrett Cooper
wrote:
>>
On 8/17/12 7:15 AM, Marie Bacuno II wrote:
On Aug 16, 2012, at 18:47, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
Hello fellow listers,
On a server with 512GB RAM it appears that vm.kmem_size_ma
On Aug 16, 2012, at 18:47, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II
>> wrote:
>>> Hello fellow listers,
>>>
>>> On a server with 512GB RAM it appears that vm.kmem_size_max is not
>>> being auto-tun
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II
> wrote:
>> Hello fellow listers,
>>
>> On a server with 512GB RAM it appears that vm.kmem_size_max is not
>> being auto-tuned to use >329853485875 (~307GB).
>>
>> On this machine vm.km
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
> Hello fellow listers,
>
> On a server with 512GB RAM it appears that vm.kmem_size_max is not
> being auto-tuned to use >329853485875 (~307GB).
>
> On this machine vm.kmem_size is equal to vm.kmem_size_max
>
> # from sysctl
> vm.kmem_si
Hello fellow listers,
On a server with 512GB RAM it appears that vm.kmem_size_max is not
being auto-tuned to use >329853485875 (~307GB).
On this machine vm.kmem_size is equal to vm.kmem_size_max
# from sysctl
vm.kmem_size_max: 329853485875
vm.kmem_size: 329853485875
On a machine with 1GB of RAM
20 matches
Mail list logo
