Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 21:37:05 -0700 From: bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> To: Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com> Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> Subject: Re: 1341MB swap in use with half gig of free memory Message-ID: <20200704043705.GC36886@www.zefox.net> In-Reply-To: <20200704022218.GD30039@server.rulingia.com> References: <20200703224433.GA36511@www.zefox.net> <20200703233938.GB30039@server.rulingia.com> <20200704011558.GA36886@www.zefox.net> <20200704022218.GD30039@server.rulingia.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 12:22:18PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> Something I missed before: When you say "Pi3", I presume you mean
> Raspberry Pi 3 Model B. None of the Raspberry Pi variants have
> provision for sanely attaching mass storage so I presume your 1TB
> HDD is attached via USB 2.0 - which is a further impediment to
> tranferring data fast.
>
Alas, little about my enterprise is sane 8-) These experiments
are all on a Pi3B (not plus). The HDD is attached via a jmicron
usb-sata adapter.
However, the Pi4 at least in principle claims to support UASP.
Unfortunately, it seems FreeBSD does not. That is a pity.
> On 2020-Jul-03 18:15:58 -0700, bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> wrote:
> >On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 09:39:38AM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>
> As Mark mentions, about the only real way to find out would be to
> actually try building with different -j options and see which is
> fastest. So long as the total working set size remains below the ~800MB
> usable RAM limit then more cores will speed it up. Once the system
> starts thrashing then goodput[1] drops to roughly zero. Unfortunately,
> the working set size varies widely.
>
Up to now I've only restricted -j values when trying to avert panics.
Perhaps the experiment is worth a try even if nothing else goes wrong.
Have you a notion whether adding additonal swap on microSD would do
any good? Earlier experiments included it. This one omitted it by
chance, never expecting the build to get this far. Knowing what to
look for is helpful.
> >A smaller browser would be a very welcome discovery. So far, chromium
> >is the only one that has worked well enough to be useful.
>
> If you just want to render HTML, images and some trivial JS, then
> something like links might do. Unfortunately, the modern Web has
> shifted to the point where the HTML is irrelevant and the actual
> content is mostly the result of executing quite complex JS within
> the browser - for those pages, you'll probably need Chrom{e,ium},
> Edge, Firefox or Safari.
It appears that links is a close relative of lynx. Both seem to
work at www.freebsd.org, but the loss of layout information makes
both rather hard to use.
Firefox isn't much more compact than chromium, is Safari good anywhere
but on a Mac?
Edge is new to me. It shows up as /usr/ports/games/edge, but I don't
think that's what you meant.... Any hints?
Thanks for writing!
bob prohaska
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200704043705.GC36886>