From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Jul 25 6:39:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from purus.tcoip (unknown [200.199.244.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4190C37B406 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:39:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from daniel.sobral@tcoip.com.br) Received: from tcoip.com.br (g3ajhpy6kieds4y6@[192.168.60.194]) by purus.tcoip (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f6KKDx412012; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:14:02 -0300 Message-ID: <3B589107.2030609@tcoip.com.br> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:13:59 -0300 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010705 X-Accept-Language: en, pt-br, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: janb@cs.utep.edu Cc: Stefan Molnar , Marek Gorka , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.3 and 6G RAM References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG janb@cs.utep.edu wrote: > I am interestied as to why this is. Is there a sound technical reason do > not support this, or was it merely the fact that there are not too many > machines that can take advantage of this anyway, and nobody got around to > do this? Yes, there is a good reason. It reduces overall performance. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) Daniel.Sobral@tcoip.com.br dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org capo@notorious.bsdconspiracy.net Talking much about oneself can also be a means to conceal oneself. -- Friedrich Nietzsche To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message