From owner-freebsd-chat  Fri Apr 16 12:53:21 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from youknow.youwant.to (youknow.youwant.to [209.133.29.10])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E023114D4A
	for <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from davids@webmaster.com)
Received: from whenever (whenever.youwant.to [209.133.29.2])
	by youknow.youwant.to (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA32138;
	Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:50:52 -0700
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>
Cc: <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: RE: swap-related problems
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:50:52 -0700
Message-ID: <000001be8842$6ef48410$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <37179347.D9D0FFEA@newsguy.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

> Sure. We call it limiting a process/user datasize. This solution is
> not more complicated than any other solution short of full
> pre-allocation, even if you do not believe so.

	You seem to be under the impression that I am looking for a _simple_
solution. I am not. I am looking for a _good_ solution. And while
process/user datasize limits are certainly part of a solution, I think I've
already clearly demonstrated that they are not adequate.

	DS



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message