From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Bradford Message-Id: <200304221745.h3MHjA8m000202@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> Subject: Re: objrmap and vmtruncate Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 18:45:10 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <182180000.1051028196@[10.10.2.4]> from "Martin J. Bligh" at Apr 22, 2003 09:16:37 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Andrea Arcangeli , mingo@elte.hu, hugh@veritas.com, dmccr@us.ibm.com, Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > > make almost zero noticeable difference on a 768 MB system - i have a 768 > > MB system. Whether 1MB of extra RAM to a 128 MB system will make more of a > > difference than a predictable VM - i dont know, it probably depends on the > > app, but i'd go for more RAM. But it will make a _hell_ of a difference on > > a 1 TB RAM 64-bit system where the sharing factor explodes. And that's > > where Linux usage we will be by the time 2.6 based systems go production. > You obviously have a somewhat different timeline in mind for 2.6 than the > rest of us ;-) It's certainly where Linux usage will be before 2.8 is ready. (and anyway, I'm sure there's a subsystem that we haven't _yet_ re-written during the feature freeze... :-) ) John. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org