From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 3 08:45:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1651816A4CE for ; Mon, 3 May 2004 08:45:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3E1043D39 for ; Mon, 3 May 2004 08:45:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) id i43FjZYD020014; Mon, 3 May 2004 10:45:35 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 10:45:35 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: Andrew Gallatin Message-ID: <20040503154535.GA14109@dan.emsphone.com> References: <200404301403.50634.past@noc.ntua.gr> <20040430123040.GB30157@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> <20040430211948.GC85783@dragon.nuxi.com> <16534.21617.310294.982202@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16534.21617.310294.982202@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> X-OS: FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT X-message-flag: Outlook Error User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: partial dumps (was Re: Change default dumpdir to /usr/crash?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 15:45:40 -0000 In the last episode (May 03), Andrew Gallatin said: > Another good idea (perhaps in combination with a larger /var) is to > accept and port to -current the Duke "partial dump" patches. These > patches allow the user to optionally dump just the kernel virtual > address space. This results in dumps that are generally less than > 100MB, rather than multiple gigs. > > In nearly all cases, only the kernel address space is needed to > interpret a dump. From what I've seen, this is what Solaris, AIX, > and Tru64 do by default. > > Porting to -current will be non-trivial because of the dump changes > between 4.x and 5.x. If I was to do this, is there any chance that > it could get into the tree? I would certainly hope so! Even a 4gb x86 machine that otherwise doesn't need swap at all would benefit, and would reduce the downtime due to the panic needing to write a full dump, and savecore needing to copy it out of swap. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com