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, 27 May 2002 22:08:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 27 May 2002 22:08:55 -0400 Received: from inet-mail4.oracle.com ([148.87.2.204]:61844 "EHLO inet-mail4.oracle.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 27 May 2002 22:08:52 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:08:33 -0700 From: Wim Coekaerts To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: William Lee Irwin III , Linus Torvalds , Alan Cox , "M. Edward Borasky" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrea@suse.de, riel@surriel.com, akpm@zip.com.au Subject: Re: Have the 2.4 kernel memory management problems on large machines been fixed? Message-ID: <20020528020817.GD21763@nic1-pc.us.oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <20020522203024.GZ2035@holomorphy.com> <384590000.1022102334@flay> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 02:18:54PM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > If we could get the apps (well, Oracle) to co-operate, we could just use > clone ;-) Having this transparent for shmem segments would be really nice. Except that we fork() from different areas, eg at startup, or from the listener process once things are up, or directly through a locally running client etc. so it's not just using clone() and done... Altho we probably should have a look at it, maybe someone already did, will check it out. Wim