Re: Memory upgrade

On 10/15/24 20:29, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 12:28:20 +0200,
> Christian Schulte <cs@schulte.it> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/15/24 12:09, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-15, Zé Loff <zeloff@zeloff.org> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 10:14:42AM +0200, Christian Schulte wrote:
>>>>> ulimit -d `ulimit -aH | grep data | awk '{print $2}'`
>>>>> ulimit -n `ulimit -aH | grep nofiles | awk '{print $2}'`
>>>
>>> ulimit -d `ulimit -dH` etc... but then there's no point setting a
>>> separate hard limit in login.conf.
>>
>> Of course. I am the only user on that system and the only limits I want
>> "my" xsession to be in effect on that system are the hard limits setup
>> by the kernel. Those make the system swap for no apparent reasons. So.
>> Why is this thing swapping?
>>
>>>
>>>>> data(kbytes) 134217728
>>>>
>>>> That's 128 GB.
>>> ...
>>>> I have no idea what stating "you can use 128GB of memory on this 8GB RAM
>>>> + 4GB swap machine" does to the system's memory management, but I
>>>> wouldn't be surprised if weird things happen.
>>
>> Same for me. This is the default hard limit on that system without me
>> having touched anything.
>>
>
> If I assume that your user is member of staff and you use default
> login.conf, when the following settings applies:
>
> staff:\
> :datasize-cur=1536M:\
> :datasize-max=infinity:\
> ...
>
> here, infinity means that you're using up to MAXDSIZ bytes.
>
> I've checked vmparam.h and it is indeed 128Gb for amd64, but for i386 such
> value is way lower: 3Gb.
>
> Have I miss something?
>

No. That's what seems to went wrong when going from i386 to amd64. The
3GB hard limit of i386 was in the range of available physical memory
(4GB) without swap. The 128GB on amd64 do not. Changing this to what
"memory" reads, makes no difference, though.

--
Christian