On 1 August 2012 14:57, John McIntosh <john...@smalltalkconsulting.com> wrote: > A few years back the interpreted virtual machine was fixed to allow an image > to grow to the 4 GB limit. > It is unclear to me if someone regressed the software to impose a 2GB limit > again, or if the 2GB number > mentioned is based on how things worked10 years ago? > > John, it is mainly about windows VM , where the limit is hardcoded to 512MB of virtual memory. I don't remember what exactly Andreas said about it, but he strongly does not recommends to go over that limit. (I played with the limit and tried a VM with 1GB limit.. it works fine, but i didn't tested it with images whose size is close to it) and maybe 2GB will work as well, but i haven't tried it.
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr> > wrote: >> >> >> On Jul 31, 2012, at 11:46 PM, johnmci wrote: >> >> > David Lewis and I spent a far amount of time a few years back to make >> > the 32 >> > vm 4gb clean. So are you running on stale knowledge here, or does the vm >> > crash when to goes over 2gb? >> >> sorry my english limit does not let me know understanding what you mean >> exactly. >> Jannik in the context of moose would like to see if we can have image >> larger than 500 mb (on mac it should be possible). >> >> Stef >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > View this message in context: >> > http://forum.world.st/Memory-usage-tp4641108p4642349.html >> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > >> >> > > > > -- > =========================================================================== > John M. McIntosh <john...@smalltalkconsulting.com> > Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com > iPhone Apps. http://www.wikiserver.com Twitter: squeaker68882 > =========================================================================== > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
