On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:59:24PM -0700, Bob Beck wrote: > On 1 February 2010 10:41, Ted Unangst <ted.unan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> I think the pool allocator is doable. Will look at it when I get a spare > >> hour or two (may be a while ;) > > > > Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! > > > > You are begging for pain. ?Multi backend allocators have not fared well.
I should mention the arm pmap bootstrap allocator (which seems to work fine). > > > > He hacks *accelerated X* and gets into pmap for fun and amusement and > occasionally joins me looking a the buffer cache and NFS.. I've not > yet decided if that's because he's simply a glutton for punshiment, > feels sorry for me being in pain, or simply finds NFS and the buffer > cache less pain that what he's usually looking at... Little from column A, little from column B. Column C, the buffer cache is about the same pain, NFS is just worse, no probably not ;). > > Telling oga there will be pain involved is not a demotivator... He > probably goes to the dentist like > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAKYQjpDtpA I'm not sure what to say to that... -0- -- Most people wouldn't know music if it came up and bit them on the ass. -- Frank Zappa
