Peter Seebach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Gilbert writes:
Due to the bloat of the OS and Motif and other such things, they
required simply amazing amounts of swap just to run.
Well, to some extent, I have to wonder why all these pages are being
requested if they aren't being used...
fork()
"Tony" == Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, to some extent, I have to wonder why all these pages are
being requested if they aren't being used...
Tony fork() with big data segments that cause swap to be reserved
Tony in case of a copy-on-write. The 2GB of swap is
Lyndon Nerenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the information in the data segment is going to be updated then
you have to have writable backing store. If, however, that data
is never going to be changed, it should be declared in the program
as read-only data. The kernel VM system should not be
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In most cases it is impossible to declare the data read-only because
it originally had to be read-write and you can't change its attributes
later.
mprotect(2).
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
Drew Eckhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In most cases it is impossible to declare the data read-only because
it originally had to be read-write and you can't change its attributes
later.
mprotect(2).
If it's available at all, mprotect() is
Tony Finch wrote:
Drew Eckhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In most cases it is impossible to declare the data read-only because
it originally had to be read-write and you can't change its attributes
later.
mprotect(2).
If it's
Maxime Henrion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tony Finch wrote:
If it's available at all, mprotect() is often limited to memory
obtained with mmap(), i.e. not malloc(). Not great for portability.
FreeBSD malloc() calls mmap() as AFAIK many (if not all) malloc()
implementations.
FreeBSD malloc()
"Daniel" == Daniel C Sobral [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
None of these solutions are portable, however; Well, no, but
the sole available definition of "portable" says that it is
"portable" to assume that all the memory malloc can return is
really
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tony Finch writes:
fork() with big data segments that cause swap to be reserved in case
of a copy-on-write. The 2GB of swap is never actually used, but you
still have to have it.
That's a good point. So, we should warn people that asking for memory
committments,
9 matches
Mail list logo
