Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site unc.unc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!unc!rentsch
From: rentsch@unc.UUCP (Tim Rentsch)
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: Why Virtual Memory
Message-ID: <384@unc.unc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Oct-85 18:04:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.384
Posted: Wed Oct 23 18:04:27 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 25-Oct-85 03:47:23 EDT
References: <480@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Reply-To: rentsch@unc.UUCP (Tim Rentsch)
Organization: CS Dept, U. of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 12
Summary: 


It is interesting to note that 10 years ago or so, all large systems
had virtual memory whereas small systems did not.

Now the largest systems (e.g., Cray 2) do not have virtual memory,
whereas it is more and more common for small systems ("microprocessors", 
and I use the term in quotes) to have virtual memory.

I wonder if in another ten years the "small" systems won't have
virtual memory, but the "large" (i.e., gigantic) systems will again?

The "wheel of reincarnation" turns ....