lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Killing/balancing processes when overcommited
    Date
    In linux.kernel, you wrote:
    >
    > resource
    > group priority kill priority
    > system 0 0 - never kill
    > support 1 1
    > payroll 2 2
    > production 3 3
    > general user 4 4
    > production backgournd 5 3 <- make sure testing and
    > general user are killed BEFORE production
    > testing 6 5
    >
    > Note that in the example above, production has the second lowest resource
    > priority, but a higher kill priority ("we don't care how long it takes, but
    > it must complete").
    >
    > In a system with sufficient resources, everyone would get what they needed.
    > As resources become limit, payroll gets resources first and testing gets
    > the least. In the extreme case, when the system is overwhelmed, testing is
    > the first to be removed.

    You seemed to have just described a combination of forced niceness
    (from login scripts) and ulimit. Man ulimit about how to limit number
    of processes plus memory etc, so people can't fork() bomb you out of
    existance.

    --
    TimC -- http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/staff/tconnors/

    Conclusion to my thesis --
    "It is trivial to show that it is clearly obvious that this is not
    woofly"

    -
    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 13:28    [W:0.049 / U:2.596 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site