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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site