Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <77d899f5feb9f06f611267885d157ad7@www.novabbs.org>
Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<77d899f5feb9f06f611267885d157ad7@www.novabbs.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Address bits again, Article on new mainframe use
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 20:48:41 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <77d899f5feb9f06f611267885d157ad7@www.novabbs.org>
References: <vb9r4g$2o1f$1@gal.iecc.com> <vbtfs8$3sl3q$2@dont-email.me> <vbu4m5$4rjn$1@dont-email.me> <20240912141925.000039f3@yahoo.com> <vbvi45$2std$2@gal.iecc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1826736"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$Y6EZ5wynYVe2uX/YHEwPRuTVMLMtLdYFCFZKNEdYBWg2W..OeFMuK
Bytes: 2250
Lines: 28

On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 20:15:01 +0000, John Levine wrote:

> According to Michael S  <already5chosen@yahoo.com>:
>>x86 Real mode segmentation is a hack to the address space. 80286
>>protected mode segmentation is something else. The only similarity
>>between the two is maximal size of segment is the same.
>
> The 386 had 32 bit segments which should have made segmented code
> practical and efficient
> and allowed giant programs with lots of gigabyte segments. But Intel
> shot themselves in
> the foot. One problem was that loading a segment register to switch
> segments remained
> extremely slow so you still needed to write your program to avoid doing
> so.
>
> The other was that they mapped all the segments into a 32 bit linear
> address space, and
> paged the linear address space.  That meant that the total size of all
> active segments
> had to fit into 4GB, at which point people said fine, whatever, set all
> the segment
> registers to map a single 4GB segment onto the linear address space and
> used it as
> a flat address machine.

Intel's only other choice was to use more than 32-bits as the segment
base address and they had run out of bits.
>