Messages in this thread | | | From | (david parsons) | Subject | Re: Some questions about linux kernel. | Date | 20 Mar 2000 00:50:43 -0800 |
| |
In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.4.10.10003171319000.3718-100000@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk>, James Sutherland <jas88@cam.ac.uk> wrote: >On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> 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...
>In fact, it makes the problem worse.
If the problem is an intruder on your system who is attempting a deliberate denial of service attack, maybe. If the problem is a program allocating more memory than there is in the system and making a different program die because of the overcommit, non-overcommit is the best solution to this feature.
____ david parsons \bi/ though the rationales for overcommit are interesting. \/
- 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/
| |