Re: Gconfd and non-resident operation..

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 04:16, Tom Lisjac wrote:
> 
> This is a crude solution at best, but the prototype systems perform well
> and have all run for several weeks without any problems. Evolution and
> other Gnome apps have been part of the testing process and also run
> normally. Still, this doesn't seem like the "right" way to do this and
> I'm hoping someone on the list can suggest a better approach. 

In principle this isn't needed on a couple of levels, one is that the
kernel will swap out unused data, and the other is that gconfd itself
will drop its cache over time. Neither of these things is necessarily
reflected in "top" though.

What you're doing probably works fine, though it's a fairly major hack
;-)

Havoc