[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:0.154 / U:2.432 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site