Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:05:20 +1000
From:      Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au>
To:        Irvine Short <irvine@sanbi.ac.za>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Large memory issues on 4-STABLE
Message-ID:  <20030915060520.GS430@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20030915070012.U36360@fling.sanbi.ac.za>
References:  <20030913092804.S46465@fling.sanbi.ac.za> <20030913123257.C51554@fling.sanbi.ac.za> <20030914162113.GA89177@dds.nl> <20030915070012.U36360@fling.sanbi.ac.za>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2003-Sep-15 07:07:26 +0200, Irvine Short <irvine@sanbi.ac.za> wrote:
>However we have a situation where if I set MAXDSIZ to 2048 or above then
>things break, so FreeBSD right now has an effectivce limit of 2GB per
>process.

+/- a GB or so, yes.  This is a side-effect of userland and the kernel
living within the same address space.  It is possible for the kernel
and userland to use different address spaces - most of the PDP-11
Unices did this - but I don't believe it's been done on any of the
32-bit or higher Unices.  Implementing on an i386 would be very messy.

>This is relevant to the work we're doing - some of my users actually
>really do need this amount of memory.

PAE is at best a kludge.  If you really need a large RAM configuration,
I strongly suggest you start saving for a 64-bit system.

Peter



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030915060520.GS430>