ten thousand small processes

[Bakul Shah]

> > Instead of complaining about wasting 78 megabytes and arguing
> > about why various proposed solutions fall short and why your
> > way is the best, why don't you come up with a patch that
> > saves space for small programs?
> 
> Funny. Seems to me that I keep making concrete suggestions---including a
> detailed proposal for giving more space to malloc()---and the answer is
> consistently ``We really don't care about per-process overhead.'' What's
> the benefit of a patch for people who don't even see the problem?

If after repeated suggestions people are not "getting it",
the reason is usually *not* apathy.  Either you are not
explaining well or your starting assumptions are different.
But show me the code!  If I like it I'll use it.  "Build it
and they will come" -- you should be familiar with that!  If
enough people like it, may be it will get incorporated in
some form.  May be.