running directly from RAM on wince?

Craig Latta Craig.Latta at NetJam.ORG
Sat May 26 09:52:34 UTC 2001


Hi Dan--

> Here's another slant on this. Suppose we always gzipped the images.
> This typically saves 50%... This would seem to be a win for two or
> more images, doesn't depend on any details of XIP, and could benefit
> the entire Squeak universe.

	Yes, although I'd be happy just being able to use one image. :)  In
particular, I've got 32M and I want to run the latest image (12M). With
the current system I'd need (while snapshotting, anyway) 36M (12M to
store the current snapshot, 12M to run it, and 12M to make a new
snapshot). Of course, I'd be willing to majorShrink the image first, but
that doesn't seem to work in the latest system (one can only run
majorShrink in the top project, which must be an MVC project, but the
top project is a Morphic project).

	With image compression I'd need 24M (6+12+6). With memory mapping I'd
need 12M (but possibly giving up crash recovery in certain conditions).
Either would be fine with me; it just seemed like less effort to get
memory mapping going (I'll find out tomorrow, when I have more time to
work on it). It also seems natural somehow to really treat a memory
image like a memory image, without copying it at all on startup.


	thanks,

-C

p.s.

	I suspect that when I start storing multiple snapshots on the PDA it'll
be because I've gone way past 32M (e.g., with a 1GB MicroDrive or
somesuch). On "normal" machines with plentiful storage I'm not terribly
concerned with minimizing snapshot size (yet :). But I think image
compression would be great, as long as the time overhead isn't onerous.

--
Craig Latta
composer and computer scientist
craig.latta at netjam.org
www.netjam.org
crl at watson.ibm.com
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list