Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 25 Mar 2000 22:38:36 -0300 (BRST) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: Virtual vs. physical swap & shared memory forks (clone) |
| |
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Linda Walsh wrote:
> The idea is *predictability*. Guarantees of behavior. > Your user deamon is fine for many cases, but it's execution is > not deterministic.
Please back up your assertions with code. If you can implement a non-overcommit option which doesn't put overhead in the normal kernel, I'm sure people will use it.
The IRIX vswap argument isn't a really valid one either. Almost all IRIX admins I've talked to had their vswap at either zero or infinity because otherwise behaviour would be too difficult to predict ... exactly the opposite of what you are saying here.
regards,
Rik -- The Internet is not a network of computers. It is a network of people. That is its real strength.
Wanna talk about the kernel? irc.openprojects.net / #kernelnewbies http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |