From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-science+bounces-519-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
	id 1Hp8LV-0005QF-D7
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 19:42:37 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4IJf1mS003020;
	Fri, 18 May 2007 19:41:01 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4IJeiBJ002388
	for <gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 18 May 2007 19:40:54 GMT
Received: from woodpecker.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B5F865557
	for <gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 18 May 2007 19:31:57 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 19:31:55 +0000 (UTC)
From: Markus Dittrich <markusle@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] [Fwd: [atlas-devel] 3.7.31 and threading problem]
In-Reply-To: <464DF942.3070401@cesmail.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705181929400.20173@woodpecker.gentoo.org>
References: <464DF942.3070401@cesmail.net>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-science+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-science+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-science+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-science.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-science@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Archives-Salt: f718376a-695e-4ac6-9821-2e782a950584
X-Archives-Hash: 72257d71da55d94197254c363cd6594b

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 18 May 2007, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

> Is this applicable to the Gentoo ebuilds?
>

Hi Ed,

What exactly are you referring to? The part about
ATL_MaxMalloc? If so, I haven't done any benchmarking
yet, but I don't see a problem increasing this
value to 160M as suggested by Clint.

cheers,
Markus


- -- 
Markus Dittrich (markusle)
Gentoo Linux Developer
Scientific applications
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGTf8txlRwCwb7k40RAmfSAJ9r5K/RD+4rxJbFm7NDH+ONWoy1ZwCeKLNL
y0jHAOSCmQI+V5mKzcWsjcE=
=LpY6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list