> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:45:40PM +0200, Martin Kopta wrote:
> >On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> >> > $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> >> > 37
> >> > $ ls -ld $HOME
> >> > dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
> >> >=20
> >> >=20
> >>=20
> >> $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> >>47
> >> $ ls -l
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 03:18:57PM +0100, David Tweed wrote:
I just know I'm going to regret getting involved in this but...
Probably not. You seem reasonable. I only flame trolls.
My understanding is that on Linux at least, reading causes the data to
be moved into the kernel's page cache (wh
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kris Maglione wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:53:27PM +0200, pancake wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12 June 2010 08:00, Kris Maglione wrote:
>>> Except it can actually fetch as much data as is addressable in mem
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 01:13:32PM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
On 12 Jun 2010, at 12:07, Kris Maglione wrote:
Yes, it does. Hugely. But, on the other hand, it's the entire basis of
modern malloc implementatons and dynamic linking and loading.
I can see dynamic linking needing to load fro
On 12 Jun 2010, at 12:07, Kris Maglione wrote:
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:04:17PM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
On 12 Jun 2010, at 11:53, pancake wrote:
That's why mmap is for. Using read is just stupid.
I've been told mmap hugely complicates virtual memory systems.
Anyone want to c
On 12 Jun 2010, at 11:56, Kris Maglione wrote:
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:45:40PM +0200, Martin Kopta wrote:
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> 37
> $ ls -ld $HOME
> dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
> > $ ls -d .* | wc -l
47
$ ls -ld $HOME
drwx
Kris Maglione
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:45:40PM +0200, Martin Kopta wrote:
> >On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> >> > $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> >> > 37
> >> > $ ls -ld $HOME
> >> > dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> >>47
>
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:04:17PM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
On 12 Jun 2010, at 11:53, pancake wrote:
That's why mmap is for. Using read is just stupid.
I've been told mmap hugely complicates virtual memory systems. Anyone
want to confirm or deny this?
Yes, it does. Hugely. But, o
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:53:27PM +0200, pancake wrote:
On Jun 12, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
On 12 June 2010 08:00, Kris Maglione wrote:
Except it can actually fetch as much data as is addressable in memory
in a single call, if the kernel and library are tailored to.
That's
On 12 Jun 2010, at 11:53, pancake wrote:
That's why mmap is for. Using read is just stupid.
I've been told mmap hugely complicates virtual memory systems. Anyone
want to confirm or deny this?
--
Do not specify what the computer should do for you, ask what the
computer can do for you.
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:45:40PM +0200, Martin Kopta wrote:
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> 37
> $ ls -ld $HOME
> dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
>
>
$ ls -d .* | wc -l
47
$ ls -ld $HOME
drwxrwx--- 40 user ...
How do you prevent dot
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 08:27:05AM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
On 12 June 2010 08:00, Kris Maglione wrote:
which has no practical implications whatsoever.
Except efficiency: the fewer system calls required to read the data
the fewer mode switches required, and mode switches are very
expen
On Jun 12, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
On 12 June 2010 08:00, Kris Maglione wrote:
The read operation can only fetch data the size of
half of the entire addressable memory space of a given machine in
one call
Except it can actually fetch as much data as is addressable in
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:48:27AM +0200, Jakub Lach wrote:
> > $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> > 37
> > $ ls -ld $HOME
> > dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
> >
> >
>
> $ ls -d .* | wc -l
>47
> $ ls -ld $HOME
> drwxrwx--- 40 user ...
>
How do you prevent dotfiles/dotdirs beeing created?
On 32 bits u can use 64 bit offsets without issues.. Just have to put
some defines before #include
Ilinux have all io syscalls dupped for 32 and 64 (open, open64, read,
read64...)
In bsd 32bit calls are just wrapped inside the 64 bit ones.
But really..64bit offsets are ok, but 64bit length
> $ ls -d .* | wc -l
> 37
> $ ls -ld $HOME
> dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
>
>
$ ls -d .* | wc -l
47
$ ls -ld $HOME
drwxrwx--- 40 user ...
$ ls -d .* | wc -l
37
$ ls -ld $HOME
dr-x-- 27 dum8d0g users ...
On 12 June 2010 08:00, Kris Maglione wrote:
> The read operation can only fetch data the size of
> half of the entire addressable memory space of a given machine in one call
Except it can actually fetch as much data as is addressable in memory
in a single call, if the kernel and library are tailo
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 07:28:48AM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
On 12 June 2010 07:16, Kris Maglione wrote:
Well, my original message was in response to:
On 11 June 2010 21:15, Anders Andersson wrote:
2GB might be silly now, much as 2MB
was silly 20 years ago. I can't see why it would be e
19 matches
Mail list logo
