Hi,
I'm trying to give the kernel (4.0-RELEASE) 2Gb of memory to work with. I
can afford to have 4Gb of physical memory on one of my servers, and hence
the experiments.
Is it safe to play around with KERNBASE, and get away without breaking
code ? Is there any other advisable method if this one
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
>
> DG changed KERNBASE a while back to reserve a gigabyte of VM for the
> kernel. This should be sufficient on a 4G machine but it depends where
> your resources are going. If your server's resources are user-process
> centric then you d
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> Don't worry about the MMU. Tests have shown that while 4MB pages are
> nice, the performance boost is relatively minor. The kernel maps itself
> using 4MB pages but normal 4K pte's are used for kernel allocations.
>
> What you are doin
On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> to handle more then 250 requests/sec. With the connection load you
> want to handle, the chance of the data being cacheable in ram is
> fairly low. So a disk-based caching proxy will drop connection
> performance by two orders of magnit
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> This is fairly easy to do. You can use SO_SNDBUF and SO_RCVBUF
> socket opts to adjust the tcp buffer space. You can make the default
> small and receive-centric and when you think you've got a good
> connection you can pump it up.
>
>
> I guess we beat you to the punch...
>
> We have a product which is now shipping, and which currently
> supports 1,000,000 concurrent connections.
I guess quite a lot of people are at it right now, the prime one is
NetScaler. If I'm not wrong, they brag about a million connections or so,
on a
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Their 3200 only has 1G of RAM; you could _barely_ fit the
> TCP state for 1,000,000 connections into just 1G of RAM,
> and have a tiny amount left over for buffers, drivers,
> the rest of your kernel, etc.. I can't believe that their
> 3100 (only 512M
"Broken pipe" generally means that your socket connection to the server
has either been torn down or hasn't been setup at all. Check to see if
this is really the case, and also check errno (you might get EBADF or
EPIPE depending upon the circumstances).
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Anjali Kulkarni wrote
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, Sean Hamilton wrote:
>
> In my case I have a webserver serving up a few dozen files of about 10 MB
> each. While yes it is true that I could purchase more memory, and I could
> purchase more drives and stripe them, I am more interested in the fact that
> this server is constan
Please wrap your postings at 72 characters.
Hurd, as I know, derived some of it's code from the Mach program. And so
does FreeBSD with it's VM (and I don't know what else). I don't see why
FreeBSD should support Hurd, etc. Hurd is a micro-kernel based system, and
quite a significant portion o
10 matches
Mail list logo
