[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Goetz Goerisch <goetz at goerisch dot net>
 To:  Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] SUGGESTION: M0n0wall flashsize and Recommended memory
 Date:  Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:34:54 +0200
Hi all,

On Sep 15, 2006, at 3:09 AM, Chris Buechler wrote:

> On 9/14/06, Jonathan De Graeve <Jonathan dot DeGraeve at imelda dot be> wrote:
>>
>> limitations. Although the bigger flashsize has a negative effect  
>> on RAM
>> usage. The current recommended is 64, it will become 96/128MB. But  
>> the
>> survey tells us 27% has < 128MB and I think its possible to upgrade
>> flash as wel as memory.
>>
>
> This is the part I think we need to be careful about.  Possibly as
> much as 90% of that 27% with < 128 MB have boards that *can't* have
> their RAM upgraded.  Virtually all Soekris 45xx boards, and some early
> and custom order WRAP's only have 64 MB and are not upgradable.
>
> But with that said, I still don't anticipate adding 8 MB to the image
> to cause many issues.  I have several 4501 m0n0wall's in production in
> various locations that always run between 40-45% RAM utilization.
> Adding 8 MB makes that more like 55-60%.  Still not critical by any
> means.  Might cause some issues with upgrades, and might cause
> problems for a very few installs that use a lot of features, but I
> think the majority would still be OK.


I have to chime in to Chris, my systems would be out then, 2 WRAP  
boards with only 64MB. :-(

Could there be two different versions of m0n0wall, one for low end  
systems and one for the rest?

Best Regards,
Goetz
smime.p7s (3.2 KB, application/pkcs7-signature)