home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
- Path: sparky!uunet!ukma!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!qualtrak
- From: qualtrak@netcom.com (Qual Trak)
- Subject: Re: FLAME, FLAME ON X!!!
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.195218.27789@netcom.com>
- Organization: QualTrak Corporation
- References: <1dn1c7INNcnp@armory.centerline.com> <1992Nov10.173203.10719@dsd.es.com> <RJC.92Nov13144522@daiches.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:52:18 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <RJC.92Nov13144522@daiches.cogsci.ed.ac.uk> rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Caley) writes:
- >In article <1992Nov10.173203.10719@dsd.es.com>, Paul Martz (pm) writes:
- >
- >pm> Yes but this doesn't sound like what the guy's describing. If this is
- >pm> just free() only freeing memory back to the process, then starting the
- >pm> same X client over again and walking it through the same sequence of
- >pm> tasks should not cause the server process size to grow, because the
- >pm> memory it freed before is still available to it.
- >
- >The word is `Fragmentation'.
- >
- >--
- >rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk _O_
- > |<
-
- If the client asks the server to make him a window - the server
- allocates the memory, not the client. All the client gets is a window
- id and the server does the heavy lifting. Only an opinion but spoken as
- gospel...
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- John Birchfield - QualTrak Corp (408) 730-2674 Home (408) 736-3852
- jb@QualTrak.COM
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
-