Re: Proposed new sysctl MIB nodes

On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:37:41PM -0800, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 07:21:44PM -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
>  > > I'd like to propose new HW_PHYSPAGES and HW_USERPAGES MIB nodes that
>  > > return the same information, but in a 32-bit page count, instead.  The
>  > > implementation is left as an exercise to the reader.  I just want to get
>  > > consensus on the names, so that I can tell the GCC people about it, and
>  > > have it work on all the BSD platforms (as their current sysctl code does).
>  > 
>  > How about simply having a total memory count in quads instead? That
>  > way we won't run out when we pass 2^48 or 49th bytes in 10 or 15
>  > years.
> 
> OK, since there hasn't been any further discussion about this, I'll take
> this to mean that we're all in agreement.  Here is the patch I'm checking
> into NetBSD.  I will check a patch into GCC to use it in a few days.

Jason,

I subscribed late, so missed the discussion about this other than
the snippet Warner forwarded to [email protected] It's not my
intend to trigger a rerun of the discussion, but what I'm wondering
about is what exactly the value is of knowing the amount of memory
physically installed in the machine given the fact that there are
process limits and the process is running in a multi-user, multi-
process environment?

-- 
 Marcel Moolenaar	  USPA: A-39004		 [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The BSD APIs Discussion Mailing List
To unsubscribe:
send "unsubscribe bsd-api-discuss" to majordomo-DZEk9q7Sfju/3pe1ocb+swC/[email protected]