[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: Killing/balancing processes when overcommited

Agreed, and I think its up to the installation to decide who that process

Regards, Jim
Linux S/390-zSeries Support, SEEL, IBM Silicon Valley Labs
t/l 543-4021, 408-463-4021,
*** Grace Happens ***

Rik van Riel
<riel@conectiva.c To: Giuliano Pochini <>> cc: Jim Sibley/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS, Troy Reed/Santa
Teresa/IBM@IBMUS, <>
09/12/02 12:02 PM Subject: RE: Killing/balancing processes when overcommited

On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Giuliano Pochini wrote:
> On 11-Sep-2002 Jim Sibley wrote:
> > I have run into a situation in a multi-user Linux environment that when
> > memory is exhausted, random things happen. [...] In a "well tuned"
> > we are safe, but when the system accidentally (or deliberately) becomes
> > "detuned", oom_kill is entered and arbitrarily kills a process.
> It's not difficult to make the kerner choose the right processes
> to kill. It's impossible.

This assumes there is only 1 "good" process to kill. In reality
there will often be a number of acceptable candidates, so we just
need to identify one of those ;)

Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".

Spamtraps of the month:

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.036 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site