On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 04:05:44PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > > > It seems that the byte counters (derived from netstat -nbi) reset at > > > around 4 GB. Is there no way around this? It would be nice to be able to > > > see an accurate display of totals. It just seems pointless to even have > > > this, as 4 GB is just not that much anymore. I know this is a 32bit > > > limitation of the variable, but that's just bad coding in my opinion (no > > > offence intended), I mean there must be some way around this. > > > > I think in the past it's been pointed out changing to a 64-bit > > variable would slow down the code on non-64-bit architectures like the > > venerable i386. > > Is there a particular reason I don't know about as to why we cannot > introduce a MD typedef for counters like this (or even just "long")? > I mean, if people make the statement that widening counters is not an > option because it slows down some platforms, I must be missing the > reason for it to be an all or none kind of issue. I believe that the expense is that acting on the counters can not be both cheap and atomic at the same time.. I think we need a whole pile of atomic primatives in addition to what we already have. including an atomic reference conting method and atomic statistics methods. > > -- > Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel_at_xcllnt.net > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" >Received on Mon Mar 15 2004 - 23:36:29 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:47 UTC