lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [why oom_adj does not work] Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard!
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 04:54:09PM -0800, David Rientjes (rientjes@google.com) 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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans