POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Pauseless GC now available Server Time
29 Jul 2024 06:21:02 EDT (-0400)
  Pauseless GC now available (Message 21 to 23 of 23)  
<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: clipka
Subject: Re: Pauseless GC now available
Date: 14 Aug 2012 17:53:21
Message: <502ac8d1@news.povray.org>
Am 14.08.2012 23:03, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:

> I said "why would you want a 140GB heap when it's impossible to have
> that much RAM?"
>
> And everyone was like "OMG, are you kidding? Of COURSE you can have
> hundreds of GB of RAM.

Yes, everyone was like that indeed.

> EVERYBODY does this ALL THE TIME for EVERYTHING!

No, nobody was like that.

Your question was based on the presumption that "it's impossible to have 
that much RAM"; everyone disagreed with that presumption and told you 
so, and examples were given that proved it wrong.

> If your company doesn't do this then they're just being cheap."

Well, actually everyone was like "If your company doesn't do this it 
doesn't mean a thing; there may be other reasons than outright 
impossibility."


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Pauseless GC now available
Date: 14 Aug 2012 18:22:50
Message: <502acfba$1@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:03:49 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>> Still, if it's as trivial as you claim to have multiple TB of RAM back
>>> in 1995, why didn't they do that?
>>
>> I don't think anyone said it was "trivial" - just "possible".
>>
>> Neither of those implies "cheap" or "desirable in all circumstances"
>> either.
> 
> I said "why would you want a 140GB heap when it's impossible to have
> that much RAM?"
> 
> And everyone was like "OMG, are you kidding? Of COURSE you can have
> hundreds of GB of RAM. EVERYBODY does this ALL THE TIME for EVERYTHING!
> If your company doesn't do this then they're just being cheap."

No, I don't think anyone responded that way.

Jim


Post a reply to this message

From: Francois Labreque
Subject: Re: Pauseless GC now available
Date: 14 Aug 2012 20:12:24
Message: <502ae968$1@news.povray.org>
Le 2012-08-14 17:03, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
>>> Still, if it's as trivial as you claim to have multiple TB of RAM back
>>> in 1995, why didn't they do that?
>>
>> I don't think anyone said it was "trivial" - just "possible".
>>
>> Neither of those implies "cheap" or "desirable in all circumstances"
>> either.
>
> I said "why would you want a 140GB heap when it's impossible to have
> that much RAM?"
>
> And everyone was like "OMG, are you kidding? Of COURSE you can have
> hundreds of GB of RAM. EVERYBODY does this ALL THE TIME for EVERYTHING!
> If your company doesn't do this then they're just being cheap."

[Citation required]

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.