home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!crdgw1!rpi!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!decwrl!pa.dec.com!engage.pko.dec.com!e2big.mko.dec.com!adserv.enet.dec.com!winalski
- From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
- Subject: Re: MEMFUL on large arrays
- Message-ID: <1993Jan27.232859.14612@e2big.mko.dec.com>
- Date: 27 Jan 93 23:28:59 GMT
- References: <4582@winnie.fit.edu> <1993Jan26.155520@mccall.com> <1993Jan26.235037.1@slacvx.slac.stanford.edu>
- Sender: usenet@e2big.mko.dec.com (Mr. USENET)
- Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
- Distribution: usa
- Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
- Lines: 16
-
-
- In article <1993Jan26.235037.1@slacvx.slac.stanford.edu>,
- fairfield@slacvx.slac.stanford.edu writes:
-
- |> You don't have to be able to virtually address the whole image. I
- |> know because I recently had a user come to me with the related
- |> problem that he could link an image, he but couldn't activate it
- |> because of insufficient VIRTUALPAGECNT...and see below.
-
- In fact, you DO have to be able to fit the entire image into the Linker's
- address space while it's being linked. But you don't have to fit in all of
- the shareable images that you link against. Thus, you might have room for
- image A.EXE to be linked, but not enough room to run A.EXE when it brings
- in various shareable images.
-
- --PSW
-