[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PURESIZE increased (again)

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:49:29 +0300

> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 17:37:59 -0400
> AFAIK these low numbers have no meaning: if the pure size overflows, the
> number printed is always some ridiculously low number, unrelated to the
> actual size of the pure space

Yes, you are right: the backup strategy zeroes out pure_bytes_used, so
what gets printed is just the portion that didn't fit into pure[].

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]