Subject: Re: Bad response...
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <>
From: Johnny Billquist <bqt@Update.UU.SE>
List: current-users
Date: 08/30/2004 09:40:17
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 11:59:27PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004, Arto Huusko wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>>> It's *obviously* not a good balance in there, for atleast my useage.
>>> Well, it can be hardly expected that the defaults NetBSD has will be
>>> right for everyone. And it seems that your usage is, at least slightly,
>>> uncommon.
>> I find it a bit strange if running a big program such as netscape
>> parallell with a system build would be considered "uncommon usage".
>> But what do I know?
> I find it a bit strange that you'd expect to be able to run binaries 100
> times as large as the average program was 10 years ago, while building the
> operating system, whose sources are 10 times as large as they were, with
> an optimizing compiler that works 10 times as hard to compile the same code,
> while serving up files -- data files and binaries *both* often 100 times
> as large as they were a decade ago -- to various other machines, with only
> twice or perhaps four times the RAM a decent desktop *or* engineering
> workstation *or* fileserver would have had then, and yet blame *the operating
> system* when you experience the obvious symptoms of having a working set far,
> far larger than the amount of physical RAM on the machine.

Whoa! Hold on to your horses here.

Are you claiming that I'm doing something unnormal or not?
And are you claiming that my hw is unusual or not?

If "no" to these both questions, then the rest of your post is 
meaningless ramble.

If "yes" to any one of them, then we can start with that.

For now, I think the default settings of the tuning is way wrong. But, as 
I said from the start, I'm sure people disagree with me, so I'm happy if I 
can just find the knobs to tune it for my purposes.
I have now tuned the knobs, and can tell you that with them rightly tuned, 
this is not a load that is even noticeable on the system, so obviously I 
think that the machine, and workload are not by any means too much. It 
works very nice, when I don't use the default settings.

But if others think those default settings are the right thing, then I'm 
not really interesting in a fight about it.

I really should already have shut up, since I've received an answer to my 
original question.

I don't really know why I'm flogging this horse.


Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email:           ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol