Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 31 May 2008 18:41:18 +0200 | From | Andrea Righi <> | Subject | Re: OOM policy, overcommit control, and soft limits |
| |
Chris Frey wrote: > I'm sure someone has thought of this before me. Does anything remotely > similar to this already exist? I've googled for OOM policy, but so far > all I've seen is Rusty Lynch's patch from 2003, and really, I want this > behaviour to happen when there is still a bit of memory left, so things > can be dealt with before they are OOM-level dire.
Have you seen the OOM killer policy implemented in memory the resource controller? http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_25#head-450b26e12955b8035a05cf07b3f31c501ee4bfab
BTW read the TODO comment in this commit log... ;-) http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=c7ba5c9e8176704bfac0729875fa62798037584d
Maybe a possible solution could be to just run critical and non-critical applications in 2 different cgroups, using different memory policies. Anyway, userspace OOM handling would surely permit to implement more interesting features.
-Andrea
| |