Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Jan 2002 06:46:14 +0100 | From | David Weinehall <> | Subject | Re: vm philosophising |
| |
On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 03:49:02PM +1100, David Luyer wrote: > I wrote: > > Alan Cox wrote: > > > > There is another VM that has a property that people would like: > > > > deterministically handling memory exhaustion. > > > > Unfortunately, that VM > > > > probably can't co-exist with over-commit and the > > > > performance gains that > > > > affords. > > > > > > It can definitely co-exist. Overcommit control is just a > > > book keeping > > > exercise on address space commits. > > [...] > > and the comment I somehow missed putting on the end: > > If you want to philosophise about VM strategies, think of > overcommit as "ethernet" and precommit as "token ring".
You mean, that while technically superior, precommit suffers from a topological problem and the fact that a very expensive concentrator is needed?! ;-)
Token Ring still lives in the spirit, though it's called FDDI nowadays...
/David _ _ // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\ // Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky // \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |