Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!mycroft From: mycroft@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs Subject: Re: [FreeBSD 1.0e] Kernel's bss has grown up Date: 06 Nov 1993 14:30:36 GMT Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Lines: 18 Distribution: world Message-ID: <MYCROFT.93Nov6093036@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> References: <2bd92f$4t@keltia.frmug.fr.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: duality.ai.mit.edu In-reply-to: Ollivier.Robert@keltia.frmug.fr.net's message of 5 Nov 1993 10:14:25 GMT In article <2bd92f$4t@keltia.frmug.fr.net> Ollivier.Robert@keltia.frmug.fr.net (Ollivier Robert) writes: I've read in the RELEASE announcement that the buffer cache was dynamic [...] Out of curiosity, I looked, and that claim is *not* true, except for a very twisted sense of what the word `dynamic' means. Buffers are allocated as file system usage occurs, but they are never freed. This is roughly the same code as 386BSD 0.1. NetBSD-current doesn't attempt to be pretentious at all about this, and simply allocates the buffers statically. For reasons I won't get into, this reduces kernel memory map fragmentation and gives better reuse of buffer space. (Using 8k/1k file systems under FreeBSD is likely to cause Hell, as it did under 386BSD, for example.)