From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 2 03:33:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C27BE16A4CE for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 03:33:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cruzio.com (dsl3-63-249-85-132.cruzio.com [63.249.85.132]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6193443D2F for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 03:33:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: from mail.cruzio.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i923YbkD000384; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 20:34:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brucem@mail.cruzio.com) Received: (from brucem@localhost) by mail.cruzio.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i923YbYB000383; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 20:34:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brucem) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 20:34:37 -0700 (PDT) From: "Bruce R. Montague" Message-Id: <200410020334.i923YbYB000383@mail.cruzio.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: durham@jcdurham.com Subject: Re: Sudden Reboots X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 03:33:32 -0000 Hi, re: > The odd thing was that it was happening at virtualy > the same time every morning.... > [...] > Then, they both just *stopped doing it by themselves* with no apparent > correlation to anything installed software-wise. Neither server has had any > problem for over a year now. * What was the external power situation, grounding, static situation, or other "noise"? Was the UPS or power-conditioning OK? Any large radars nearby? :) Radars have actually been known to matter. I once knew a system that died like this and it turned out to be because it was mounted three floors above a loading dock... a ROM pin or somesuch was doing a great job as a vibration detector, whenever trucks backed into the dock hard. Which brings up the question, what's the cheapest/best way these days to atually monitor high-res sags/spikes/sags on the line into a box? Decades ago it was a Drantez meter; I see they're still around: www.dranetz-bmi.com Does anyone have any such "line-monitor" unit that they particularly recommend as a good low-end buy? * Handwaving general remark about VM space overhead... Early virtual memory systems rapidly ran into the problem that all of physical memory became consummed by page tables. The solution was to page the page tables (which is why modern architectures support hierarchies of page tables). As systems become larger this solution typically becomes less-and-less effective, because each page in every _virtual_ address space requires a page table entry. If you have many large addresses spaces, this requires many page table entries total (this acts as pressure to make pages larger). The page tables become large data structures; managing them (keeping parts in memory when needed) can become a bottleneck. If you have other restrictions (the page tables have to fit in an address space segment, say, a kernel data segment), the virtual space allocated for this data structure can become exhausted. A kernel usually needs to have page tables that can map every page of physical memory, so for this page table, the more physical memory present, the larger the table. Page tables are used because they allow a page table entry to be accessed via a simple addition based on most of the virtual address. This is fast. As address spaces grow above 32-bits, the potential size of the page tables becomes more important. For very large address spaces some form of "single-level store" or "inverted page table" scheme is often proposed. Instead of having a page table entry for each page of virtual address space, these systems have the equivalent of a page table entry for each page of _physical_ memory. All addresses are effectively disk-block+offset addresses; the virtual memory hardware does an associative search to locate the physical block in memory that corresponds to the disk-block. This requires more expensive hardware then a simple addition, but such systems only require a page table entry for every page of physical memory. These systems have been built from early days, but are typically not competitive with VM systems that require simple addition. (I think the IBM AS/400 is the only widely-used commercial hardware using this approach) At some point address space growth, cheap associative lookup memories, and required page table size may make this approach competitive. - bruce