lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Overcommitable memory??
Andreas Bombe wrote:
> > Because it *IS* overcommitment of memory. You can have two processes, each
> > with their 200Mb of data, in a machine with 256Mb RAM+swap, quite happily
> > - until they start writing to it, at which point you discover you have
> > overcommitted your memory, and things go wrong.
>
> He means avoiding overcommit by counting vm requirements but without
> actually copying COW pages (denying a COW allocation if it could not
> be faulted in at a later time). Resulting in vast areas of unused
> RAM.

Just like the mythical internet Quality of Service, you can always find
a use for that non-dedicated capacity... The RAM will never be unused.
It will used by MAP_NORESERVE mappings, processes that specifically said
"I don't mind being overcommitted", and fs cache.

have a nice day,
-- Jamie

-
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:0.746 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site