From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <775b8d190609171420t577d9a6fyaa2e4530eb7461dc@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:20:04 +1000 From: "Bruce Ellis" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] install "out of physical memory" In-Reply-To: <6f2d88478639cf5b64080093392c4a1e@quanstro.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <775b8d190609171410q4dacb30bm2ed211fcf87c821b@mail.gmail.com> <6f2d88478639cf5b64080093392c4a1e@quanstro.net> Topicbox-Message-UUID: b9458d80-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 fixed size is no option. try building gs. brucee On 9/18/06, erik quanstrom wrote: > let's face it. there are some questions that are best left unasked. buy > lots of memory, keep a swap partition and keep your fingers crossed > that you never need an answer to that question --- what do i do when > i run out of memory! > > either that, or do like knuth. we keep a fixed tablesize for everything. > we size these variables to the memory size of the machine, then we > will never run out of memory. if you try to start one too many processes, > it will helpfully give an error message before you start. ;-) > > - erik > > On Sun Sep 17 16:11:27 CDT 2006, bruce.ellis@gmail.com wrote: > > i've never had problems with swap. my setup at the labs was diskless > > "terminal" with lotsa ram and swap on /n/other. it never failed, tho swap > > was really only there to cope with extraordinary circumstances. > > > > i have a similar setup in sydney tho "other" is local. > > > > killing a random process is not a solution. it's an egregious hack. > > > > brucee > > >