Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pucc-i
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!houxz!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H:Pucc-I:ags
From: ags@pucc-i (Seaman)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: nuking newsgroups (and memory constraints)
Message-ID: <321@pucc-i>
Date: Mon, 18-Jun-84 15:24:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: pucc-i.321
Posted: Mon Jun 18 15:24:02 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Jun-84 00:38:05 EDT
References: <1966@utcsstat.UUCP> <545@opus.UUCP>
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 14

>  ... you probably don't remember the story a few years back in a trade
>  journal explaining how someplace had figured out a clever way to get around
>  the 16-MEGAbyte address-space limitation per process that exists on a 370.
>  That's right - someone not only blew out the top end of 16 Mb in one
>  process; it hurt enough that they "solved" the problem.
>  [Please don't bother to write to tell me that the 370 is most of the
>  problem.  You can divide the memory size by 2 or 4 and it's still absurd.]

Is there something wrong with running tasks in a virtual space larger than
16Mb?  We run many such jobs on our CDC CYBER 205 every day.
-- 

Dave Seaman			"My hovercraft is full of eels."
..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags