On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 11:45:05AM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:16:42AM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>>
>>>Dave,
>>>
>>>Some comments on your analysis.
>>>
>>>The latest perl uses auto-image-base and the base address should be
>>>differen
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> At least we figured that perl crashes when it uses more than 384 MB RAM,
> similar C programs don't crash.
The fact that perl crashes is, IMO, a perl bug, which still needs to be
fixed. Perl shouldn't *crash* (i.e., segfault). It could report an out
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:16:42AM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
Dave,
Some comments on your analysis.
The latest perl uses auto-image-base and the base address should be
different than default. It fails anyway.
Perl uses its own malloc, rebuilding with the syst
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:16:42AM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>Dave,
>
>Some comments on your analysis.
>
>The latest perl uses auto-image-base and the base address should be
>different than default. It fails anyway.
>
>Perl uses its own malloc, rebuilding with the system malloc shows
>that it
Dave,
Some comments on your analysis.
The latest perl uses auto-image-base and the base address should be
different than default. It fails anyway.
Perl uses its own malloc, rebuilding with the system malloc shows
that it behaves similar than the C examples, I think the recent
changes in Cygw
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
> Original Message
> >From: Igor Pechtchanski
> >Sent: 28 July 2005 14:58
>
> > Hmm, but shouldn't this code fail regardless of the value of
> > heap_chunk_in_mb? Why does increasing heap_chunk_in_mb make this
> > succeed?
>
> Perhaps it only makes
Original Message
>From: Igor Pechtchanski
>Sent: 28 July 2005 14:58
> Hmm, but shouldn't this code fail regardless of the value of
> heap_chunk_in_mb? Why does increasing heap_chunk_in_mb make this succeed?
Perhaps it only makes it succeed if you increase heap_chunk_in_mb until
that
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
> Original Message
> >From: Krzysztof Duleba
> >Sent: 28 July 2005 08:00
>
> > Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> >> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Krzysztof Duleba wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am not. I understand that this is how it should work
> >>> theoretically, but I've _c
8 matches
Mail list logo
