> On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 08:27:22PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > > is virtual memory a problem on 32bit OS? I think even 32bit CPUs do have > > support for much larger _virtual_ memory.
On 26.03.07 14:35, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > With a 32-bit CPU, you are limited to 4 GB address space no matter what. > Usually, it is 1 GB for the process and 3 GB for the kernel. There are > patches available that make a 2/2 split possible. However, there are > performance issues to consider. IIRC, even CPUs that have PAE (36-bit > addressing for up to 64 GB of physical RAM), can still only support 4 GB > address space *per process* because they are at heart 32-bit machines. Yes, but that's just and only address space for one process. CPUs with PAE extension can have 64GB of REAL memory, so they can have at least that much of virtual memory. Note that tmpfs doesn't need to be addressable by one process. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. "Two words: Windows survives." - Craig Mundie, Microsoft senior strategist "So does syphillis. Good thing we have penicillin." - Matthew Alton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
