From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 15:27:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 15:27:41 -0400 Received: from bitmover.com ([207.181.251.162]:26448 "EHLO bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 15:27:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:27:30 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Larry McVoy , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Wow! Is memory ever cheap! Message-ID: <20010507122730.A19632@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: "H. Peter Anvin" , Larry McVoy , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010505095802.X12431@work.bitmover.com> <20010506142043.B31269@metastasis.f00f.org> <20010505194536.D14127@work.bitmover.com> <9d6qk6$i86$1@cesium.transmeta.com> <20010507115659.T14127@work.bitmover.com> <3AF6F11E.3A03050E@transmeta.com> <20010507121822.V14127@work.bitmover.com> <3AF6F5B8.42F803C1@transmeta.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <3AF6F5B8.42F803C1@transmeta.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 12:21:28PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Larry McVoy wrote: > > What does BitKeeper have to do with this conversation? > > Because your original post was "yeah, Bitkeeper is a memory hog but you > can get really cheap non-ECC RAM so just stuff your system with crappy > RAM and be happy." Doing so dedicates my system to running a small set > of applications, which I am utterly uninterested in. .. BitKeeper isn't a memory hog, the kernel is bloated. Over 100MB of source last I checked. BitKeeper is incredibly good at _NOT_ being a memory hog, it uses the page cache as its memory pool. If things fit in the cache, they go fast, if they don't, they don't. BitKeeper is just like diff in that respect. If you think BitKeeper is a memory hog, then you must hate diff too. How about netscape? Don't run that either? Give me a break. .. It's great that you aren't interested in running that set of small applications, I'm sure the entire kernel list is happy to learn that. .. You can get really cheap ECC ram as well, even if it were 2x as expensive, that's still really cheap, less than 50 cents a megabyte, so what's your problem? Go get some ECC memory and be happy. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm