On Jul 9, 2013, at 9:16 AM, Igor Stasenko <siguc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8 July 2013 22:52, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am with Doru here.
>> Today, 500MB is NOTHINGGGGGG.
>> NOTHIIIIIIIIING.
>> NOTHING.
>> A LATOP comes with 8GB. 16x more than the max the VM can allocate.
>> For one of my clients, I have just set up a server with 32GB. It has 64x
>> than the max a Pharo VM can allocate. Really?
>> Going to disk is not always a possibility for many many reasons.
>> And even if it were possible....if I have to spent XXX hours to workaround
>> Pharo because it cannot use more than 500MB, then people will simply move to
>> another language.
>> And finally, wasn't a language like Smalltalk prepare for you and let you
>> only focus in your app blah blah blah.. ? having to go to disk doesn't
>> sound like that...
>>
>> So, Igor, I cannot stand that point of view. I can stand many others, like
>> explaining why it's not Pharo fault, the problem window has, the money/time
>> it would take for an engineer to fix it, etc etc etc. But not your position.
>>
> My point is that people should stop raising this topic again and again
> and do something about it.
> Either rewrite memory management in VM, to dynamically allocate address space,
> or rewrite own application to use disk memory.
>
> And i know that 512mb is nothing, especially for application which
> deals with big amounts of data.
> But from that perspective, 8GB is nothing as well. Be realistic: if
> you need to generate/process lots of data,
> you should not rely on just operative memory, it is pretty limited
> resource, comparing to disk memory.
> It was like that from the very beginning, and i think it will stay
> like that for a while.
>
"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
-- Bill Gates
>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Mariano
>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko.
>
