lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 28 Sep 2001 09:34:09 +0200
FromJesper Juhl <>
SubjectRe: OOM killer
Alan Cox wrote:

>>> shed:~# echo 0 >/proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
>>> shed:~# cat /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
>>> 0
>> 
>> ahh, I see. Well, you live and learn ;)
>> 
>> I think I've got to do my research better before writing mails to lkml.
> 
> 
> In part.
> 
> The option you want is '2' which isnt implemented 8)
> 
> 0	-	I don't care
> 1	-	Use heuristics to guesstimate avoiding overcommit


Thank you for that info :)

I wrote a small test program that allocated memory in increasingly 
larger chunks, and I saw no major difference with a setting of "0" or 
"1", it seemed both settings allowed my program to allocate exactely the 
same amount of mem before ENOMEM was returned (I can send the test 
program on request).

I'll be looking forward to a setting of "2" becomming available :)


Best regards
Jesper Juhl

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2008