lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Overcommitable memory??
    On Sun, 19 Mar 2000, Jesse Pollard wrote:

    > It is part of the issue. The system would never go OOM, users would go
    > OOR (Out-Of-Resources). Out of resources is a manageable entity, that
    > can be adjusted from the results of performance analysis. OOM is a
    > catastrophic failure of the system. If the system doesn't provide a
    > way to control it, direct which user is at fault, and as directed by
    > management policy, then that system is considered buggy and not ready
    > for production use.
    >
    > >Besides, the "random abort that may crash the system" is not the
    > >alternative. It is a choice of WHICH process gets the OOM error first
    > >- the "true culprit" (the memory hog), or any old process which
    > >happens to want memory?
    >
    > Right now there is no way to determine which proces should get terminated.

    Why not set resource limmits? It's just like any other resource .. if I
    allow users unlimmited access to it I can fully expect to have someone
    crash the system.

    Gerhard



    --
    Gerhard Mack

    gmack@innerfire.net

    <>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:2.517 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site