From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c1b1b81e16e83802 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-01 05:30:03 PST Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 14:21:23 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rodrigo_Garc=EDa?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020513 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Help-memory allocation References: <87y8zjvckv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <878yriobaz.fsf@Login.CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: lglpc31.epfl.ch Message-ID: <3f017cef$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> X-Trace: epflnews.epfl.ch 1057062127 128.178.76.8 (1 Jul 2003 14:22:07 +0200) Organization: EPFL Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-09!supernews.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1!bredband!'newsfeed1.telenordia.se'!news.algonet.se!algonet!skynet.be!skynet.be!news.mailgate.org!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!epflnews.epfl.ch!not-for-mail Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39954 Date: 2003-07-01T14:21:23+02:00 List-Id: Florian Weimer wrote: > vashwath@rediffmail.com (prashna) writes: > > >>Don't you think "commit on allocate" is better choice? > > > At least on UNIX systems with a few typical UNIX services, the > situations in which the system continues to run in commit-on-use mode > is a proper subset of the situations for commit-on-allocate mode. So > commit-on-use is the better choice. Ok Florian, you convinced me. I know that GNAT uses malloc for memory allocation on its Linux implementation. Looking at malloc man page, one can read in the last paragraph: "Linux follows an optimistic memory allocation strategy. This means that when malloc() returns non-NULL there is no guarantee that the memory really is available. In case it turns out that the system is out of memory, one or more processes will be killed by the infamous OOM killer." So I guess this is normal in the case of systems with virtual memory. Rodrigo