upvote

points

by jmclnx23 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby man8alexd21 hours ago|
next
[-]
FreeBSD didn’t have memory overcommit and instead used strict swap reservation - each allocated anonymous memory page was supposed to have a corresponding swap page. This required 2x RAM swap space, otherwise you would get “out of swap” when forking a large process. FreeBSD implemented memory overcommit around 2000.
reply
upvoteby jandrese21 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Oh, so that's where that old nugget of wisdom came from! I've heard the rule about making your swap at least 2x your RAM for ages and thought it was just some old rule of thumb from the 80s. I didn't know there used to be a legitimate reason for it.
reply
upvoteby 0x45721 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Yes, It's just not every tool is aware of ZFS ARC. Which is what this post is about. Author just describes in an odd way.
reply
upvoteby mike_hock5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's a bit odd that you have to query a filesystem-specific value to get simple memory usage stats.
reply
upvoteby 0x4572 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Despite having File System, ZFS is a lot more than just file system. Sooner you understand and make peace with it, easier it is to use it.
reply
upvoteby uniqueuid3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Which is exactly (part of) why people call ZFS a "rampant layering violation"!
reply
upvoteby shevy-java22 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I remember how NetBSD promoted itself as running on many more toasters than Linux once.

Then some NetBSD dev wrote on their mailing list that this is no longer true. Linux runs on more toasters now. (And also top 500 supercomputers, but toasters are the real metal to the petal test.)

These fights always remind me of:

https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html

It's an interesting piece of history too. I kind of evaluate it a bit differently, e. g. my summary is "momentum beats academic perfection". Which is not completely what it is about, but it is my own imperfect TL;DR summary.

reply
upvoteby Someone7 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> but toasters are the real metal to the petal test.

Or is that a new tongue in cheek idiom?

AFAIK, it’s peDal, not peTal, and the other way around: pedal to the metal. The literal meaning is to push your accelerator pedal down to the floor of your car, which is made of metal.

reply
upvoteby goodmythical3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
"metal to the petal" gives me more of a "gilding the lily" flavor, especially in cnotrast to the original construction.

Still not sure if it was on purpose, but I read it as a reference to a "but can it run DOOM?" benchmark.

reply
upvoteby bee_rider21 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
This basically fits my stereotype of BSD being a little bit more hardcore while Linux is a little more accessible… when the question was “can you install an OS on a toaster,” BSD had an advantage. Now that normal engineers have to make IOT toasters (for some reason) Linux should have the advantage, right?
reply
upvoteby sublinear21 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Normal engineers don't do that either.
reply
upvoteby Levitating21 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
why did that url point me to a scrotum in an egg cup
reply
upvoteby UnlockedSecrets21 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Seems like at a glance that website if it sees a referral from ycombinator, it redirects to that image.... In a private window it loads the 'intended' page.....
reply
upvoteby m0llusk18 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
HN has disappointed JWZ
reply
upvoteby saghm7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Just blackholing the request would be kinder than taking it out on the person following the link, given that their gripe seems to be more with the one who posted it (and that as a deterrent, it doesn't seem to be particularly effective given that it's been years since the first time I've seen this conversation play out in comments)
reply