chris@ubeaut.enet.dec.com (Chris Jankowski) (05/07/91)
(I am cross posting this to comp.arch as it seems to be a general operating system issue.) In article <1991Apr30.160331.16215@milton.u.washington.edu> corey@milton.u.washington.edu (Corey Satten) describes certain behaviour of Ultrix 4.? virtual memory subsystem and the way to tune the system. I think that he also suggests that Ultrix 4.? uses pretty much standard BSD 4.3 algorithms in this area. This raises interesting questions: 1. Did other vendors (who derived their commercial U*X offerings from BSD) modify or tune the virtual memory subsystem to significant extent perhaps providing new nifty algorithms? 2. What does it looks like for ATT System V rel. 3 and 4? Do they have very different virtual memory management? 3. What is the state of the art in this area considering vastly increased demands on the virtual memory subsystem imposed by X.11, RDBMS, transaction processing and the like applications? 4. Do other operating systems using virtual memory approach differ much in the way of the algorithms used for virtual memory management? Enquiring minds would like to know. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Chris Jankowski - Open Systems Eng.- chris@ubeaut.enet.dec.com |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| Digital Equipment Corporation (Australia) tel.+61 3 655 5622 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 45 Exibition St, Melbourne 3000, AUSTRALIA fax +61 3 655 5655 ... and in the last 50 years ... there has never been a famine in a country with a free press - Lawrence Summers - chief economist - World Bank