Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:09:40 -0300 (BRT) | From | Marcelo Tosatti <> | Subject | Re: Kernel 2.2.14 OOM killer strikes. |
| |
On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, Claudio Martins wrote: > On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, Mike A. Harris wrote: > > > > > >Now, whether Netscape should register such a handler is up for debate - > > >it may very well be the culprit for causing the OOM situation in the > > >first place. However, it _could_ also free a lot of memory from its > > >internal cache as well. > > > > Yes indeed. Netscape is definitely an OOMish app. It would be > > nice to be able to say to netscape "hey, give me back 50Mb of RAM > > you potato!" and have netscape actually do it, assuming it isn't > > memleaking (yeah right... ;o) > > > > > Hey! That's the real problem! SIGDANGER is a good ideia, but if you're > going to install a sig handler for every application running, then I don't > know if it will work at all.
Not only this.
I dont know SIGDANGER well, but for what I've heard about it in this thread, it is unfair.
A memory hog will cause other processes which has SIGDANGER registered to free memory, while RSS dynamic limits (when implemented) will make the hog slower (or killed), instead penalizing "non guilty" processes.
- 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/
| |