Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:38:24 -0500 | From | Chris Wedgwood <> | Subject | Re: Memory overcommitting |
| |
>Or, perhaps the other way around. The majority of developers are going to >want non-committed allocations, for the simple reason that it helps one's >application co-exist with others. If the system enters into a situation >where VM has become so sparse that the allocations I had previously been >granted can no longer be met, it's a good bet that the whole enchilada is >headed for dangerous waters. 99% of the time I would rather segfault, try >to clean up gracefully and get out of the way of everyone else. >Certainly, in a few instances it might be desireable to have truely >committed allocations, but changing the allocation operation completely >could cause a problem for existing applications (especially on lower end >systems).
If you want truly committed memory, walk over it to forcibly allocate the memory (hit one byte every 4k will do it) then mlock it. Ugly...
-Chris
| |