[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [why oom_adj does not work] Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard!
    On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 04:54:09PM -0800, David Rientjes ( wrote:
    > > This does not work if processes are short-living and are spawned by the
    > > parent on demand. If processes have different priority in regards to oom
    > > condition, this problem can not be solved with existing interfaces
    > > without changing the application. So effectively there is no solution.
    > >
    > Wrong, you can change how the application is forked. Either immediately
    > adjust /proc/$!/oom_adj or use the adjustment inheritance property and
    > change /proc/$$/oom_adj to the desired value prior to forking. Thanks.

    You and Alan so like bash... Applications are not always forked from shell.

    I already pointed multiple times where parent om_adj changes lead, and
    that this does not work in a real world for some common cases. Existing
    scheme only works if some daemon (or application itself) explicitely
    changes oom_adj, but no dameon exists to monitor /proc and applications
    do not change their own and child's oom_adj because it is way too
    linuxish to add such hacks to deal with system's oom-killer, which can
    not be properly configured otherwise.

    Evgeniy Polyakov

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-01-15 09:45    [W:0.019 / U:46.040 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site