lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Some questions about linux kernel.
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, James Sutherland wrote:
>
> > No. *ANY* memory allocation system can run out of memory. Avoiding
> > "overcommitting" would make the OOM situation arise SOONER (and more
> > frequently), as well as killing performance.
>
> well, it's a more a question of whether you make promises that you
> might not be able to keep. If you do (ie overcommit) then it's your
> (kernel) problem. If you don't, it's not.

> > So his processes STILL end up dying randomly, but they do it sooner rather
> > than later. Hrm. Wow.
>
> but then it's the users problem - not the OS..

Erhmm, sorry that I have to say this Paul, but this
sounds like non-overcommit is about shifting the blame
and not about fixing the problem...

Knowing all of this, would you still want a non-overcommitting
system where you need more swap just to run out of memory sooner?

If a renegade application steals all memory, it will cause
other (innocent) applications to die. Unless you have some
code in the kernel which is able to shoot down the renegade
process and save the rest.

(non-)overcommit isn't going to make any difference here...

regards,

Rik
--
The Internet is not a network of computers. It is a network
of people. That is its real strength.

http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.116 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site