Kilon wrote: >I have read that already Pharo VM has some restrictions on how much ram an >image can use. Obviously even for >todays standard 4GBs for a single app is a >bit excessive but if pharo apps continue to grow in complexity and we >start >to venture in areas of demanding ram needs , then it wont be hard to brake >that 4GB barrier.
Why? It takes me less than 20 minutes to run out of available ram now, even though my machine has 8 times more. On current hardware, 512GB is a more reasonable maximum size for a single app. Pharo apps have needed more than 4GB for as long as Pharo exists, nearly all Moose applications are strongly limited by it. Philippe wrote: >Object Spaces with dedicated GC and possibly dedicated cpu looks like a better >idea than a flat 64bit VM and OE to >me. Not to me. They force me to spend time thinking about partitioning at the moment I don't want to. Current machines support more than 4G/core, so 64 bits flat is needed anyhow. Later binding, I want later binding! And Objects Spaces too. They seem like a good idea. But later :) The java GC situation is ridiculous, and only exists because Oracle wants to sell databases. Stephan
