> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jordan Brown > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 10:46 > I have never heard of a malloc implementation that has artificial limits; Er... setrlimit(RLIMIT_DATA). For OSes that claim Single UNIX Specification compliance. >if it's failing it's because it can't find that much contiguous virtual address space, and mmap won't be able to > find it either. FWIW, SUS Issue 5 defines RLIMIT_AS as applying to both malloc and mmap, but RLIMIT_DATA as applying only to malloc. (That is, mmap'd pages do not count against the data limit.) > If you're a 32-bit process, then malloc'ing or mmap'ing a 2GB object will be difficult at best. Agreed. And I'm not endorsing the mmap approach for this problem anyway - I'd use a streaming approach, so I'm not limited by address space. -- Michael Wojcik Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
