3 ms·
This doesn't even seem like a reply to what I said. If you map memory anonymously you aren't doing interprocess communication. If you don't, you have a file p
by CyberDildonics 5y ago
This doesn't even seem like a reply to what I said.
If you map memory anonymously you aren't doing interprocess communication.
If you don't, you have a file path that the other program can use to map the same memory.
That's it, there is nothing wrong with this. I don't know why this is so upsetting. Mapping memory anonymously is local to the process tree and doesn't work for two different programs communicating.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jstimpfle 5y agoOk, I'm extremely embarassed but it looks like I got the terminology wrong with regards to "Anonymous memory". And sorry for being so upset, at least I finally got something out of it. It's also a fact that if I'm using disk swap space on a Unix, the same performance and stability issues apply as for disk backed file mappings. In that sense, there really is no difference.