Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site opus.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!hao!nbires!opus!rcd
From: rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: Why Virtual Memory
Message-ID: <150@opus.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 24-Oct-85 02:26:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: opus.150
Posted: Thu Oct 24 02:26:23 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Oct-85 05:12:54 EDT
References: <480@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO
Lines: 16

> Why virtual memory when physical memories are getting larger?
> 
> Protection and resource allocation.
> 
> Mapping two address spaces disjointly is a very easy way to insure
> two processes don't get in each other's way...

These aren't related to virtual memory.  They are arguments for memory
protection; specifically, protection which works in a fashion independent
of physical address.  Other protection methods (non-paging) will meet these
desires.

(The other arguments of the parent article are OK, tho.)
-- 
Dick Dunn	{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd		(303)444-5710 x3086
   ...At last it's the real thing...or close enough to pretend.