Re: Memory overcommitting (was Re: http://www.redhat.com/redhat/)

Robert de Bath (robert@mayday.compulink.co.uk)
Sun, 23 Feb 1997 12:04:54 +0000 (GMT)


On Fri, 21 Feb 1997, Torbjorn Lindgren wrote:

> False. Linux fork() has a standard fork(), *NOT* a vfork.
>
> All modern *NIX'es uses Copy-on-write fork()'s, but that a very different
> animal from a vfork()... Not that many *NIX'es have real vfork()'s...
snip snip snip

You know, linux could have a real vfork, I _think_ it would just be a
case of giving the correct options to a clone() syscall.

It might be useful when implementing a more facist mode wtr overcommits.

>
> One thing that is missing in Linux is the possibility to *disable* the
> overcommitment, which is very usefull for some applications...

--
Rob.                           (Robert de Bath <robert@mayday.cix.co.uk>)