|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Attn: Laptop Ufies | by yazdi | 2007-10-22 05:27:42 |
|
More RAM is almost always better. | by Qcumber-some | 2007-10-22 05:41:00 |
|
Even if you don't use the RAM right away, | by roger G. rapid | 2007-10-22 05:56:04 |
|
I'm running both WinXP and Linux with Ramdisk | by Qcumber-some | 2007-10-22 06:10:44 |
|
ooOoo, neat. | by Freakazoid | 2007-10-22 10:33:42 |
|
Compiling is disk-space intensive | by PeKaJe | 2007-10-22 14:32:56 |
|
Right, right, and nevertheless :-) | by Qcumber-some | 2007-10-22 14:57:03 |
| It all depends on the amount of RAM, of course |
by PeKaJe |
2007-10-22 15:47:18 |
| Personally, I wouldn't attempt this without at least 2GB RAM, but that is of course becoming low-end these days. Looking out for big packages is one thing, but I have learned to also watch out for packages that require excessive amounts of RAM while compiling. This can be particularly troublesome one a multi-core machine, as an unfortunate timing could make a bunch of compiles each eat up hundreds of MB. If it needs to go into swap because the memory is also occupied by files, then it could end up taking much, much longer to finish (tried that a couple of times, though for different reasons). But as you say, if it's a laptop with a slow hard disk (as they usually are), then it may very well be worth it. It's just damn annoying when the inevitable happens and a compile fails because of a lack of disk space. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
