On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Srebrenko Sehic wrote: > How about having a possiblity to define a limit in relative way? Like > 80% of free memory or something. That way, kernel would not crash and > the limits could be dynamic, depending on the current memory utilization. > > I understand that this could have performance penalities (since memory > checks should be done for every new state created). > > There must be a better way to handle this, rather then hardcoding state > limits. No?
I think the amount of overhead that would cause, is not really worth it... //Wouter
