Messages in this thread | | | From | "Matija Nalis" <> | Subject | Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...? | Date | 23 Mar 2000 03:22:33 GMT |
| |
On 22 Mar 2000 12:33:49 +0100, Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> wrote: >> On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 22:02:33 -0600, you wrote: >> Yes, we KNOW you want user resource quotas. You can't have them yet, >> so stop talking about them - they are irrelevant here. > >Why "you can't have them yet"? Does that mean it IS planed to put resource >quotas in? This is the first I've ever heard that it was planned.
It just means the kernel lacks the infrastructure that would enable creating of per-user resource quotas at this time. But, most people did agree (even those who are anti-noovercommit) that user resource quotas are good idea.
>And I don't think they are irrelevant. If this is not the location to >discuss kernel features, what is?
Opening some other thread in LKML, perhaps ?
-- Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.
- 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/
| |