Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mdcbbs!solomon From: solomon@mdcbbs.com Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo Subject: Re: SR10 GotchaDOWN Message-ID: <519.25275fa3@mdcbbs.com> Date: 2 Oct 89 13:16:18 GMT References: <8909291500.AA06515@umix.cc.umich.edu> Organization: McDonnell Douglas M&E, Cypress CA Lines: 19 > - the one major problem (and > one which we still have not totally resolved) is that the > radical changes in how virtual memory is implemented > cause major consternation for some of our applications > (Pre-empting the obvious question, by radical changes > I am refering to the fact that at SR10 address space > is mapped to disk at time of creation, rather than > at use. If you have data structures designed > for the former paradigm, you're not sitting too > well for the change). You're not the only one!! Yeh, for some applications this memory enforcer may be ok, but if you have a monster of a program with many many modules that are not in use at the same time, this is a real pain! ANSI standards are fine, but I say give us an option as to whether or not we want memory locked in or as in the good ol' days. Apollo, you've got a good idea in place. Please give us the option. Barry Solomon