Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!network.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!math.fu-berlin.de!irz401!uriah!not-for-mail
From: j@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: Virtual memory problem
Date: 28 Jun 1993 18:01:48 +0200
Organization: Textil Computer Design GmbH, Dresden, Germany
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <20n4lcINN291@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de>
References: <1993Jun24.015842.21623@news.arc.nasa.gov> <20f920INNc79@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> <hastyC972zI.6oL@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bonnie.tcd-dresden.de
In article <hastyC972zI.6oL@netcom.com> hasty@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) writes:
>In article <20f920INNc79@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> j@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de (J Wunsch) writes:
>> first, setting the default size to more than the
>>amount of physical memory available might cause your system
>>thrashing if you attempt to run something that allocates as much
>>virtual memory as it can get.
>
>Interesting, but I have managed to compiled InterViews, X11R5, flefax,
>gnu's smalltalk (a great memory hugger).
>and whole lot of applications with the method which I posted --
>limit datasize unlimited, etc....
Amancio, certainly this won't break as long as you only compile. But,
to test the behaviour, i've used a simple mallocing program. (Of
course, it's necessary to write a byte to each page, so they become
dirty.) And that trashed the system. That's why i'm still using
a certain limit. And on the other hand, there's no common process
from which a new limit could be inherited to all processes (other
than init). Thus i found it easier recompiling the kernel with
a new option, regardless of the userID i'm actually using, all
my defaults show up as 16 MB now.
--
in real life: J"org Wunsch | ) o o | primary: joerg_wunsch@tcd-dresden.de
above 1.8 MHz: DL 8 DTL | ) | | private: joerg_wunsch@uriah.sax.de
| . * ) == |
``An elephant is a mouse with an operating system.''