Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:17:09 +0100 (CET) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: Overcommitable memory?? |
| |
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > On Tue, 14 Mar 2000 14:32:49 -0300 (BRST), Rik van Riel > <riel@conectiva.com.br> said: > > >> Without overcommit that just can not happen. There will be > >> either a free page of memory or a free page of swap into which > >> you can swap something else out. > > > Without overcommit it can still happen, unless you reserve one > > page of swap space for every page of data that gets mmap()ed... > > Even that doesn't cure things. Think about stack growth.
Exactly.
I'd really like the non-overcommit fans to come up with a good reason why a non-overcommitting system doesn't suffer from the same problem, but all I've seen so far are changes to the problem :)
(and no, I don't believe there is any solution to OOM on any system that allows userspace to dynamically allocate memory ....)
cheers,
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/
| |