[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux 2.2.15pre12
    >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Jakma <> writes:
    > size issues aside, proper accounting that allows linux to better
    > predict when to say no is surely better than after the fact
    > killing. It seems cleaner to have code to predict, than to kill. Then
    > we could gracefully say no, rather than ungracefully have to say
    > "die" to quite possibly innocent programmes.

    The usual problem with "no overcommit" is that it is grossly wasting
    swap space. The typical example is system(3) which does a fork+exec(/bin/sh):
    if you call it from a 500MB process, you temporarily need another 500MB
    of swap even though it will never really be needed (since it's cow-shared).

    Of course, swap space is cheap, so it's not necessarily such a big issue,
    but on the other hand, the cases where a half-clever OOM-killer doesn't
    cut the mustard are rather far and few apart.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.019 / U:9.336 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site