On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 13:22:56 -0800, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> However small, it's still O(n). >> >> Yes but for a typically running SAGE program n is about 3-4, at most. >> There's no reason in SAGE to launch numerous subprocesses. > Maybe I'm just not used to the idea of having 64GB of ram yet, but 2MB, > though it won't bring a system to its knees, doesn't seem tiny to me. > Maybe it is because of oprhan processes, but I often see more than 3-4 > sage processes running at a time. E.g. one might have a notebook with > several worksheets (which each have their own sage subprossess) which may > have, say, magma and mathematica and maxima running. I propose we try out various solutions (starting with mine), see what works well in practice, then see if we can recode the best one in C so it is smaller (though we'll keep the Python one also, which is potentially more cross-platform). William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
