🚀 go-pugleaf

Deniel wrote:

> So the question is - Are you SURE that using 'new' force that
> all the allocation will sit ONLY on a 'real' RAM and will not
> use the Hard-Disk at all? (and that's what i want)

From our experience if your application is the only application running
and you are 'hitting' addresses across the entire range on a regular
basis Windows will not swap it out.

OTOH this is probably only because none of our addresses look idle and
nothing else needs them. It might also be that our application is a CPU
hog (for good reason) and Windows only looks for idle pages when the
scheduler is idle (IOW:We might simply not be giving the OS any spare
time to swap things out). In our case it's a hash table so the entire
block will look active all the time. If yours is a 'simple' array then
Windows might spot areas that haven't been accessed for a while and
might swap them out to disk.

Then again..that's the way things are supposed to work at least as far
as Windows is concerned. If you haven't accessed a page of memory for a
while then it /should/ be swapped out to disk. Personally I dislike
this proactive swapping strategy but I think I have to concede that MS
wouldn't have done it without a good reason. Older style OSes don't do
this. They only swap out when something else needs the memory and
that's a strategy I much prefer.

-- 
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
http://info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html