lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?
Date
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.055 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site