| To: | Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: %u-order allocation failed |
| From: | Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 7 Oct 2001 09:35:39 +0200 |
| Cc: | Krzysztof Rusocki <kszysiu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.3.96.1011006194028.5632A-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from Mikulas Patocka on Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 07:48:52PM +0200 |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.33L.0110061357560.12110-200000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.3.96.1011006194028.5632A-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hi!
> > So what are you going to do when your 64MB of vmalloc space
> > runs out ?
>
> Make larger vmalloc space :-) Virtual memory costs very little.
> Besides 64M / 8k = 8192 - so it runs out at 8192 processes.
Hard to do of machine with 1GB ram... There, virtual memory costs
*very* much.
Pavel
--
I'm pavel@xxxxxxx "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: %u-order allocation failed, Eric W. Biederman |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: %u-order allocation failed, Alan Cox |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: %u-order allocation failed, Anton Blanchard |
| Next by Thread: | Re: %u-order allocation failed, Alex Bligh - linux-kernel |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |