Re: some thoughts..

["Michael K. Johnson" <johnsonm redhat com>]

Timo Sirainen writes:
>I can't really believe this works well.

Your lack of faith doesn't change reality.  By the way, this whole
demand loading issue is a FAQ, and is covered perfectly well in
Linux-specific documentation.  I'm not sure why we are rehashing it
in this GNOME mailing list...

>Well, maybe if the application is
>build so that Linux knows right what code is used, but for example
>netscape and kde, why do they take so much memory and don't work well
>with computers with low memory? They use all their code and do "if
>(!do_i_need_to_do_something()) return" type things everywhere? I don't
>know, but I'm sure I haven't used any sounds and still KDE's sound servers
>eat megs of memory.

Linux can't work miracles.  If a program really DOES use lots of
memory, Linux can't magically expand the amount of memory installed
on your system.

Just because netscape and kde use lots of resources does not mean
that Linux can't demand page very, very effectively.

>Shared libs are loaded entirely to memory or just parts of them?

Only the parts that are used, and parts that are read once and then
not read again will eventually be dropped from memory.

>And do you mean that they are
>not even loaded or that they are loaded to memory and possibly placed to 
>swap?

No, not loaded.  Never saved to swap.  If loaded but not changed, not
swapped, just forgotten about and reloaded.

>And I don't know about gmc's code

we gathered that...

>but I just had some feeling that if program works in text mode,
>X, windows, etc, it must have useless code..

Um, let me suggest a quick perusal of the mc source code before you
continue your critique.  The answers will be VERY obvious.

michaelkjohnson

"Magazines all too frequently lead to books and should be regarded by the
 prudent as the heavy petting of literature."            -- Fran Lebowitz
 Linux Application Development       http://www.redhat.com/~johnsonm/lad/