Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 23 Nov 1996 17:24:34 +0000 (GMT) | From | Gerard Roudier <> | Subject | Re: Bugs and wishes in memory management area |
| |
On Sat, 23 Nov 1996, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Linux-2 + Xserver + fvwm (95) + severall xterm + bash + xemacs + gcc + > > some application processes = more than 16 Mb. > > Well let me suggest something > > Linux-2.0 + Xserver -su -bs + original fvwm + rxvts + ash + joe in rxvt + lcc > > Now tell me the problem is the kernel
I (we) have no problems with linux kernel. But we have problems with some other systems (WNT, Bletch95, SCO, etc..). I use original fvwm and some traditional editor each time I donnot need something more sophisticated = most of the time (a console is often enough). However, I seems to me that most linux users like sophisticated tools (??).
> > A serious ftp server or web server probably use more than 64 MB. > > Web servers need little RAM. Current FTP servers need a lot because wu.ftpd > is a pile of crud when it comes to the word 'efficient'. I dunno if other > ftpds are better and useful. Troll ftpd is efficient but not quite right > somewhere.
Thanks for this information.
> > Now imagine a system with 128 MB of RAM and some controller(s) that use(s) > > ISA/DMA and: > > If you can afford 128Mb of RAM you can afford PCI bus DMA
Obvious, but sometimes not applied.
> > Managing such situation may complexify the kernel too much. > > Indeed > > > In this case, garbaging 1 MB of memory at startup for ISA/DMA need is > > probably a good solution. > > Why waste memory ?
Just to show that "silly+simple" can be cleverer than "complex". Obviously we can do something better than just losing 1MB. "Simple and clever" is indeed better.
Regards, Gerard.
|  |