Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:35:57 +0300 | | From | Evgeniy Polyakov <> | | Subject | Re: [why oom_adj does not work] Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard! |
| |
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:50:58PM +0100, Bodo Eggert (7eggert@gmx.de) wrote: > > This does not work if processes are short-living and are spawned by the > > parent on demand. > > They will have the same name, too. Your Kenny-killer will fail, too.
It is not always the case, processes start executing different binaries and change the names, that's at least what I observed in the particular root case of the discussion.
> > If processes have different priority in regards to oom > > condition, this problem can not be solved with existing interfaces > > without changing the application. So effectively there is no solution. > > ACK, but being a child should count. Maybe the weight for childs should be > increased, if it does not do the right thing? Or maybe the childs do share > much (most of the) memory, so killing the parent is the right thing if you > want to free some RAM?
There could be lots of heuristics applied for the different cases, but without changing the application, they are somewhat limited to long-living processes only. There are really lots of cases when it does not stand.
-- Evgeniy Polyakov
|  |