[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Overcomittable memory
    Den 13-Mar-00 17:16:23 skrev Michael Bacarella følgende om "Re: Overcomittable memory (Was: Linux 2.2.15pre12)":
    >> > A big rendering process that fork()/exec()s lpr.
    >> > Without overcommit you'd need to have the 500 MB of swap free
    >> > that the big simulation is using, even though it'll only use
    >> > 1 MB for the little process that's being exec()ed...
    >> This doesn't mean that overcommit is a good idea. It just means that
    >> fork()/exec() is not a good way of launching programs. Using overcommit to

    > fork()/exec() is the greatest thing to happen to UNIX and I trust you know
    > why. Using something like spawn() to invoke a new process would make me
    > feel dirty and in need of showering with brillo.

    Much of this whole thread demonstrates why fork()/exec() is not great
    for launching programs, the example above is just one of them. As someone
    else pointed out (correctly, AFAIK), using vfork()/exec() instead is the


    | Rask Ingemann Lambertsen | E-mail: |
    | Please do NOT Cc: to me or the | WWW: |
    | mailing list. I am on the list.| "ThrustMe" on XPilot, ARCnet and IRC |
    | To err is human. To really f*ck things up requires the root password |

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.021 / U:131.348 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site