Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.hawaii.edu!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!news.mathworks.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.mtu.edu!msunews!news From: Steve Dunham <dunham@notung.msu.edu> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD ... (FreeBSD extremely mem/swap hungry) Date: 28 May 1996 14:36:17 -0400 Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 22 Message-ID: <m23f4kejby.fsf@notung.msu.edu> References: <3188C1E2.45AE@onramp.net> <4o3ftc$4rc@zot.io.org> <31A5A8F6.15FB7483@zeus.co.uk> <31A5D0A8.59E2B600@zeus.co.uk> <4oca4b$1gm@keltia.freenix.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: pm099-01.dialip.mich.net X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.2.1/XEmacs 19.13 roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) writes: > Uh ? You'll have this penalty only if you link with the DES libcrypt. The > MD4 libcrypt uses less memory. > > The VM subsystem in Linux and FreeBSD are very different although I think > Linux recently got an unified VM/buffer cache like we do since post 2.0. It > is true that FreeBSD needs more swap than Linux ; it is an artifact from > the VM system. I also think that our VM system is more advanced but I > haven't compared line by line. Don't bother, by the time you got done with the comparison, they will both have changed. :) Steve