Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:04:18 +0100 | From | Helge Hafting <> | Subject | Re: 2.4.16 memory badness (fixed?) |
| |
"M. Edward Borasky" wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > I just can't understand why the kernel wouldn't tag application memory > > as being more important than buff/cache and free up some of that stuff > > when an application calls for it. I mean, it won't even use the gobs of > > swap I have. That just seems to be a plain ol' bug to me. > > It's not strictly a bug ... it's a design decision that has unfortunate > consequences. A simple fix would be to allow the system administrator to set > an upper limit on the size of the page cache.
I'd say he has found a bug. Merely prioritizing cache over apps so apps go to swap is a design desicion. Killing the app for OOM reasons when there is free swap and/or cache that can be freed up _is_ a bug.
Helge Hafting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |