On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 16:06 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 32 bit machines can't use more than 4G. Bigmem kernels fiddle and go partway
> but to use more than 4G use 64 bit!
More specifically, the bigmem 32-bit kernel uses PAE to use RAM greater
than 4GB.
The bad news is that this doesn't inc
Visser, Martin wrote:
I think that the technology Gavin is thinking of is more about
economising on the content being sent rather than tweaking TCP
parameters.
Hi,
I'm familiar with the Riverbed equipment and I have to say that its very
protocol dependent.
SMB/CIFS is very chatty in gen
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 10:44 +1000, Visser, Martin wrote:
I think that the technology Gavin is thinking of is more about
economising on the content being sent rather than tweaking TCP
parameters.
The only thing I'd add is that link optimisation runs out of steam
at pretty low bandwidths, say >15
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 17:36 +1000, David Kempe wrote:
> Oh and at Glen Turner - how is bandwidth greater than 155Mbps considered
> low? :) (yes i know you work at aarnet! :)
Hi Dave,
It depends on your situation, obviously. Here's a quick
summary from the ISP's view.
It doesn't make economic
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 11:57 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 11:15 +0930, Glen Turner wrote:
> > Secondly, if you run a QoS network connected
> > to a non-QoS network then you might want to do deep packet
> > inspection and set the DSCP on incoming traffic. Otherwise
> > you end
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 11:15 +0930, Glen Turner wrote:
> Secondly, if you run a QoS network connected
> to a non-QoS network then you might want to do deep packet
> inspection and set the DSCP on incoming traffic. Otherwise
> you end up with a situation where the user on the non-QoS
> network gets a
Editors:
Ian Hickson, Google, Inc.
David Hyatt, Apple, Inc.
Abstract
This specification defines the 5th major revision of the core language of the
World Wide Web, HTML. In this version, new features are introduced to help Web
application authors, new elements are introduced based
Hi all,
But can you use a 64bit kernel on a 32bit processor?
I was assuming you couldn't however I'm happy to be corrected.
Ben
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Glen Turner
Sent: Thursday, 26 July 2007 5:16 PM
To: slug
Subject: RE: [SL
On Friday 27 July 2007 09:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> But can you use a 64bit kernel on a 32bit processor?
> I was assuming you couldn't however I'm happy to be corrected.
Absolutely NOT. You can run 32bit stuff on 64 bit hardware cause the
manufacturers made it to be so, but they'
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 10:44 +1000, Visser, Martin wrote:
> I think that the technology Gavin is thinking of is more about
> economising on the content being sent rather than tweaking TCP
> parameters.
The only thing I'd add is that link optimisation runs out of steam
at pretty low bandwidths, say
On Thursday, August 2 2007 from 6:30PM,
there will be a social gathering of Sydney Python Users Group and
any individuals interested in discussing Python, Web, Ruby, Perl etc.
Laptops, code review, show and tell etc allowed and encouraged.
We meet in the ground floor area next to P.J. O'Briens P
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 10:54 +1000, James Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 13:37 +1000, Gavin Carr wrote:
> > Hey sluggers,
> >
> > Anyone have any pointers to open source projects (or features of projects)
> > around WAN link optimisation? I'm specifically looking for a way of
> > duplicat
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 08:57 +1000, Ben Donohue wrote:
> But can you use a 64bit kernel on a 32bit processor?
> I was assuming you couldn't however I'm happy to be corrected.
No you can't. It uses special 64-bit instructions that
are not supported on 32-bt processors. Note that there
are a lot of
On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 10:44:19AM +1000, Visser, Martin wrote:
> I think that the technology Gavin is thinking of is more about
> economising on the content being sent rather than tweaking TCP
> parameters.
Thanks a lot for all the comments in this thread so far - been some
interesting reading.
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 15:36 +1000, Gavin Carr wrote:
>
> What I'd _really_ like, though, (and haven't found any explicit
> references
> to yet) is like (3) but actually duplicating packets down multiple
> links, a
> sort of 'network raid 1' where (3) is network raid 0. In other words,
> somethi
Hi all,
Just to ask a bit more...
The server has 5GB mem but top reports 3632188KB.
That is approx 400K missing.
I have another server with 4GB and it reports 34KB approx with
around 600K missing.
Shouldn't top report 410 approx (whatever the numbers are).
Ben
IMPORTANT NOTICE TO R
cat /proc/meminfo
or was that mentioned already?
Dean
Ben Donohue wrote:
Hi all,
Just to ask a bit more...
The server has 5GB mem but top reports 3632188KB.
That is approx 400K missing.
I have another server with 4GB and it reports 34KB approx with
around 600K missing.
Shouldn't top r
Gavin said :-
"What I'd _really_ like, though, (and haven't found any explicit
references
to yet) is like (3) but actually duplicating packets down multiple
links, a
sort of 'network raid 1' where (3) is network raid 0. In other words,
something that transparently splits a stream into multiple
18 matches
Mail list logo
