"Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Please revert this again. I've thought about it some more while jogging, and I've identified a few other problems that mine and your solution share based on your input (most prominently: large chunks that do not fit into the preallocated area at all). I would suggest I will change the current solution to cope with all that without sacrificing my earlier ideas as well as yours in the next few days, if you don't mind. Bye, Axel.