Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 25 Mar 2001 18:12:56 +0200 (MET DST) | From | Szabolcs Szakacsits <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Prevent OOM from killing init |
| |
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Jesse Pollard wrote: > On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote: [ .... about non-overcommit .... ] > > Nobody feels its very important because nobody has implemented it.
Enterprises use other systems because they have much better resource management than Linux -- adding non-overcommit wouldn't help them much. Desktop users, Linux newbies don't understand what's eager/early/non-overcommit vs lazy/late/overcommit memory management [just see these threads here if you aren't bored already enough ;)] and even if they do at last they don't have the ability to implement it. And between them, people are mostly fine with ulimit.
> Small correction - It was implemented, just not included in the standard > kernel.
Please note, adding optional non-overcommit also wouldn't help much without guaranteed/reserved resources [e.g. you are OOM -> appps, users complain, admin login in and BANG OOM killer just killed one of the jobs]. This was one of the reasons I made the reserved root memory patch [this is also the way other OS'es do]. Now just the different patches should be merged and write an OOM FAQ for users how to avoid, control, etc it].
Szaka
- 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/
| |