@ On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 8:11:51 PM UTC+8 Jan Mercl wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 12:54 PM Kn (Kn) <hit.zh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Now the problem begins. I expect the ballast like `ballast := > make([]byte, 1<<30)` shouldn't take up any physical memory because there's > no any writing to it. > > The backing array is specified to be zeroed, so we cannot say there's > no writing to it. Depending on the size of the backing array and the > operating system it may not get written as an optimization if backed > by memory the OS can guarantee to be zero filled. Only then it may > remain not yet bound to physical memory. > > A simple implementation will just zero it, meaning the opposite > happens - every byte of the backing array gets written and backing > pages for it get allocated. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/9a0c291e-6dc2-4c40-889e-be7f7190cba0n%40googlegroups.com.
