Gold huh, I wonder what it was missing as far as internal comments. Did you ever get the red sections of text that were source code? I can't even count how many stupid times I got that talk on we do not release or copy red source out of KB articles. I mean realy, like who I am going to take it to and with out the complete code what real good was a few lines?
Sorry walk down memory lane terminated (paged).
From: James Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] windows 2003 memory tweaking Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 15:39:02 +0100 On 8/15/05, Dustin Tuft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Minor interjection.. > > Did I miss understand the whole point of mixing Virtual and Physical ram? > was it not the point of the OS telling the App where and how to get memory, > and if I am not mistaken, Apps don't even directly touch ram, that little > interface called HAL handles it, so as far as the App is concerned it's all > physical ram. Yes, but changes in the environment affect the system in a particular way, you understand. The app controls merely the volume of memory it allocates (and most of the time de-allocs ;-p). Nothing contrary to this has been discussed by either of us. > So back to the point, static setup for a static need, it's not like were > going to have a melt down if you can't lunch solitaire on the server that's > meant for serving... Well that's exactly it, also the memory manager is very creative in these situations. Don't you just love the yellow boxes. > oh yes the MS KB, how I miss the internal one, if only I was allowed a > burner while I was employed under the PSS outsource :'( I lost access to a gold partner and mvp login, not everything though. n'er mind. > > >From: Clayton Macleod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > >To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > >Subject: Re: [hlds] windows 2003 memory tweaking > >Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 05:25:53 -0700 > > > >Been too long I guess, I don't recall. For some reason my memory > >seems to do better with the meat than with the potatoes. > > > >Yeah, I addressed the collateral stuff in my next post there. > > > >I'm not saying the executive memory space is unimportant. I only said > >that applications' memory space isn't the executive's memory space. > >Because it's not, they're definitely seperate from each other, and > >handled seperately/differently. I simply stated that this setting > >doesn't affect applications and the paging of their memory. Perhaps > >it would've been more accurate to say that this setting doesn't > >*directly* affect applications and their paging activity. Since the > >only way it affects it is by the fact that if you disable the > >executive's paging you are left with a smaller amount of RAM that > >could be available to applications. And indirectly this could/would > >change the amount of paging the applications experience. But windows > >comes with a default setting to allow the executive's memory space to > >be paged out for a reason, because portions of it can be inactive > >enough to warrant paging it out. No reason for my scanner driver to > >be in RAM when the scanner hasn't been used or even looked at since > >bootup, for instance. And allowing the executive to be paged would > >likely mean that driver would indeed be paged out whenever the OS > >could use that RAM elsewhere. Even if it's only a few dozen k. > > > >On 8/15/05, James Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The most common cause of misrepresentation is the fact that Windows > > > pre-pages most data to prevent massive delays in freeing physical ram > > > when necessary. Was it Wang that was talking about that? Might have > > > been, and IIRC it was discussed during beta 2. > > > > > > > > > Just because taskmgr doesn't report accurately does not mean the system > > > cannot account for all memory. Wang would be most upset (and probably > > > out of a job) if this was the case. Complete enumeration of these values > > > is costly however, which is why it's unecessary for taskmgr. It's almost > > > more important to have the values provided anyway. > > > > > > > > > phew. > > > > > > > > > It does, because all changes to paging rates will change paging rates of > > > other applications too. Call it what you will, starvation, pre-tension, > > > or any of the other terms that people have tried to use to coin the > > > factor of side-effects within dynamic caching algorithms, but it's > > > princliple is the same. If there is something that needs to be regularly > > > accessed but is not regularly scheduled it can cause failures (well, > > > fail is too strong a word, but you know.) in the algorithms which can be > > > reduced by changing their run-time settings. This is simply what happens > > > in this scenario. Never underestimate how active the kernel and driver > > > pages are! > > > > > > > > > Please don't try to tell me that the executive memory space is > > > unimportant, I know that you already know this isn't true. > > > > > >-- > >Clayton Macleod > > >get ye flask > >You cannot get ye flask. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > >please visit: > >http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
