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.