On Jun 28, 2013, at 1:40 AM, Stephan Eggermont <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. not sure, it is not so easy to produce an efficient large memory manager/garbage collector. but anyway, I agree that we need to be able to handle much larger spaces than we can now. Esteban > > Stephan > >
