> which is suicide on the typical x86 32bit system that has max 3.2GB (+/-)
> addressable physical memory[1], never mind the issues it causes with reduced
> space for page tables and such.
>
> if you read through all the microsoft KB articles and stuff on that flag, it
> was recommended for use only under tightly controlled circumstances, like a
> 32bit windows server that was dedicated to running 1-2 specific apps that
> were OK with it,.
Fair enough, but I wasn't actually advocating that as a solution to
the poster's problem. I was merely pointing out that it isn't strictly
true that there is an absolute limit of 2GB of addressable memory for
user processes in 32-bit XP.
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan
