Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 3 May 2002 07:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Patrick Thomas <root@utility.clubscholarship.com>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
Cc:        <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: RFC on my SHM tunings for multiple jailed postgres...
Message-ID:  <20020503071536.G86733-100000@utility.clubscholarship.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020503082731.GI36741@elvis.mu.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

So kern.ipc.shm_use_phys=1 will give me more flexibility, but will slow
down performance (vs. using kernel memory) ?

thanks,

PT

On Fri, 3 May 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:

> * Patrick Thomas <root@utility.clubscholarship.com> [020503 00:38] wrote:
> >
> > I have a large server that will be running ~24 jails, 8 of which will be
> > running their own postgres server.
>
> You should be aware of the kern.ipc.shm_use_phys sysctl, you might
> want to try flipping it on if you encounter problems as it will
> greatly reduce the amount of kernel memory required to track
> shared memory segments at the expense of making them non-pageable.
>
> --
> -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org]
> 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
>  start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'
> Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/
>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020503071536.G86733-100000>