From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 24 13:51:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org 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 6D09A16A422 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:51:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from petros.fraser@gmail.com) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CAB143D45 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:51:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from petros.fraser@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 71so285591wra for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 05:51:35 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=hQ+fHq5rQ29sJQ2bDWmRs955X3QP3pvG7rlwphu0xCmLIyx3dUVF8t3NliRHYz/yBtfOCwlmAqVnrRzfLzzkFVL1A7lqufI//Eb6cITwWBV0N9wIRFPnM+sAOEpGmQC+ETqAHVqVpxp0DKZShLY64tvlJV4l2CY2kULiRF9RmI0= Received: by 10.54.126.20 with SMTP id y20mr1442554wrc; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 05:51:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.122.20 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 05:51:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 08:51:35 -0500 From: "Peter Fraser" To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org. In-Reply-To: <20060223205739.P33959@fledge.watson.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20060223205739.P33959@fledge.watson.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: Virtual memory consumption (both user and kernel) in modern CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:51:46 -0000 On 2/23/06, Robert Watson wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Peter Fraser wrote: > > > It's truly a ptiy that so serious a thing is an issue so near to a > release. > > I agree that users should be given a choice especially since some of us > run > > non-threaded apps that spawn a number of processes. From what I have > read, > > wouldn't a squid + squidguard combination rely much more heavily on swa= p > > now. If so, I think I will also stick with the 5 series and 6.0 in my > > environment. > > If I read your e-mail right, you're referring to reported issues regardin= g > the > new user space malloc implementation in 7.x. However, the 7.0 release is > still well over a year away. The new malloc implementation is not presen= t > in > 6.x, and I wouldn't expect a merge to the 6.x branch any time soon, if > ever. > Unless you were planning to run 7.x in production in the next year, > something > I generally wouldn't recommend without very careful consideration, I'm no= t > sure how this affects your decision regarding FreeBSD versions to run -- > neither of the upcoming FreeBSD 5.5 or FreeBSD 6.1 releases would be > affected > in any way. Perhaps there has been a misunderstanding? > > Robert N M Watson Thanks for the clarification. I was under the impression from a previous post that this would be inplemented in the new 6.1 release. Apparently I misread. I can now breathe a sigh of relief and migrate to 6.1 when released. Thanks again. PeterF