Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 1 Nov 1996 15:45:26 +0200 (SAT) | From | Mike Kilburn <> | Subject | Re: RFC: New kernel proc interface |
| |
On Fri, 1 Nov 1996, Rob Riggs wrote:
> When the file is closed, all that memory is freed. 3.2MB is > a pitance today. Anyone that is using 40K routes can afford > the US$12 for another 4MB.
Not that I disagree but to be realistic about it you can rarely just add "4MB for US$12". Adding more memory usually requires more than popping in a 4MB simm.
> > The current proc code was the best solution when RAM was limited. > Today's systems have much more RAM than in the past. Hacks like
I think it depends on the application. Linux is used in many environments. Not all are servers or X11 workstations or big routers.
> If this is really an issue, implimenting backwards compatibilty > for memory critical proc routines is trivial.
Please do. Maybe one could implement proc as a loadable filesystem module. This way we could have a different version for machines that cannot afford the bloat of proc (new or old).
|  |