Den 17-Mar-00 10:04:27 skrev James Sutherland fĝlgende om "Re: Overcommitable memory??":
> Yes. There may be a few, specialist applications where you truly want/need
> overcommit disabled (embedded apps, perhaps?) - but for the desktop/server
> market, overcommit is almost essential.
Lost of non-Linux systems work fine without it. Do you actually have any
numbers to back up your claims?
A programmer can waste quite a lot of time hunting for non-existant
bugs to explain crashes caused by a kernel which can't keep count of its
memory. Been there, done that.
Regards,
/ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻTŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ\
| Rask Ingemann Lambertsen | E-mail: mailto:rask@kampsax.dtu.dk |
| Please do NOT Cc: to me or the | WWW: http://www.gbar.dtu.dk/~c948374/ |
| mailing list. I am on the list.| "ThrustMe" on XPilot, ARCnet and IRC |
| Windows NT is the OS of the future and always will be... |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:28 EST