[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #9924] Suggestion for a memory() function

From: Lars Kindermann
Subject: [Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #9924] Suggestion for a memory() function
Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 10:52:31 -0400 (EDT)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0

Follow-up Comment #15, patch #9924 (project octave):

32Bit systems with PAE can use up to 64GB of RAM, but every process is limited
to a virtual address space of 4GB, 1GB is typically assigned to the kernel,
3GB to the userspace. This user/kernel split is defined when compiling the
kernel, with the 3GB/1GB being the default:

So the RAM that is available to each octave process is limited by the total
RAM available on the system or the virtual address space left for the process,
whatever is smaller.

That's why I think the RAM available to the process is more important than the
free RAM on the system. I added that computation to a new version of memory.m,
so user.RamAvailableAllArrays and syst.PhysicalMemory.Available are different

Maybe to avoid confusion, the field name could contain the term Octave, e.g.
RamAvailableOctave istead of RamAvailableAllArrays?

(file #48984)

Additional Item Attachment:

File name: memory.m                       Size:7 KB


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]