Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Overcommitable memory?? | From | Olaf Weber <> | Date | 19 Mar 2000 12:13:44 +0100 |
| |
Jesse Pollard writes: > On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Olaf Weber wrote:
> One thing I thought of that would help reduce the effect of > fork/exec sequence on the reservation - If the fork only reserved > say 5-10 pages - then if the new process exceeded this reserve then > entire amount should be reserved. This would reduce the peak > reservation in the case of a fork followed by an exec. This delayed > reservation should give nearly the same peak as the current method, > and protect against the worst case.
It seems an interesting hack^H^H^H^Htechnique. The parent process should of course be aware that a fork can almost immediately be followed by the child dying thanks to OOM. Then again, that's true now too, so if the parent cannot cope, it is buggy today.
-- Olaf Weber
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are quick to anger and have no need for subtlety.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |