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