From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep  4 11:53:23 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 F101116A4BF; Thu,  4 Sep 2003 11:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (rwcrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.198.39])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 30D9B43FFB; Thu,  4 Sep 2003 11:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: from interjet.elischer.org ([12.233.125.100])
          by attbi.com (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP
          id <2003090418532101500r4r2ae>; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 18:53:21 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA41656;
	Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:53:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <3F56352F.7050701@acm.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0309041152140.41602-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
cc: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
cc: Max Clark <max.clark@media.net>
Subject: Re: 20TB Storage System (fsck????)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:53:24 -0000



On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Tim Kientzle wrote:

> Max Clark wrote:
> > Ohh, that's an interesting snag. I was under the impression that 5.x w/ PAE
> > could address more than 4GB of Ram.
> 
> That's >4G of memory in the system.  32-bit processors
> are still limited to 4G processor address space, which means
> <3G per process (allowing some memory for kernel operations).
> You can't get around that unless you either go for a 64-bit
> processor or do some complex coding to break your application
> storage across multiple processes.


It's worse than that, becasue I think that to handle >4GB of ram you
need to limit your processes to about 2G of virtual space.