At 11:47 AM 12/23/2003, Paul Kranenburg wrote:
> > i've been running tests with this patch for a few hours on my
> > U5/270 without incident.  works for me!
>
>Good.
>
>I'm still trying to decide what the best compromise is in order to
>avoid excessive memory fragmentation (a danger with any pool based
>allocation scheme) and still allow a fair degree of freedom for
>configuring the buffer cache sizes. I'm thinking of using MAXBSIZE
>pool page sizes for all buffer pools on machines with lots of
>physical memory, while being more economical on low memory machines.

pool(9) doesn't support having items that are bigger than a page.
(since on alpha, mips, powerpc pool are mapped 1:1 with physical
addresses so virutally contiguous pages probably won't be physically
contiguous).

-- 
Matt Thomas                     email: matt@3am-software.com
3am Software Foundry              www: http://3am-software.com/bio/matt/
Cupertino, CA              disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message.