[Top] [All Lists]


To: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re:
From: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:23:26 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105121852211.300-100000@dbear.engr.sgi.com> <>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Seth Mos wrote:

> At 22:59 12-5-2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >Tom Duffy wrote:
> >
> > > I was wondering what the smallest memory system somebody has tried XFS
> > > on.  The webpage says 64MB minimum and I know that I have seen XFS working
> > > on 64MB, but I was wondering, will 32MB be ok?  How about 16MB w/ swap?
> > >
> > > Ananth told me that the recovery was the most memory intensive part...so,
> > > I would like to know if anybody has gone through a recovery on a low
> > > memory system and things have been OK...or not?
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> >
> >So here is an aging machine for you...
> >32meg p90... just fast enough to run xmms :-)
> >Yes hard to believe I'm actually running a linux box at home.
> I have a Pentium 233 MMX with 32MB ram and a 20GB disk that seems to do
> fine recovering from a reboot.
> It isn't really fast but it's a small MySQL database server that needs the
> uptime more then it does speed. It will never be hit very hard.
> I have not tried a 486 yet but I will see if it works someday. If I get
> Mips on the Cobalt Qube2 going again I will test that one too :-)

Is there a 2.4 version of the kernel for qube?

I have one sitting in my office not doing anything... it would be nice
to toss XFS and a fiber channel card in the the thing and turn it
into something useful.

> Bye
> --
> Seth
> Every program has two purposes one for which
> it was written and another for which it wasn't
> I use the last kind.

Russell Cattelan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>