From: James A. Sutherland <jas88@cam.ac.uk>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromi@cyberspace.org>,
"Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Slats Grobnik <kannzas@excite.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <andrewm@uow.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] a simple OOM killer to save me from Netscape
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 21:44:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0japdtkjmd12nfj5nplvb4m7n8otq3f8po@4ax.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104171650530.14442-100000@imladris.rielhome.conectiva>
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:53:51 -0300 (BRST), you wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
>> >It's a very black art, this; "clever" page replacement algorithms will
>> >probably go some way towards helping, but there will always be a point
>> >when you really are thrashing - at which point, I think the best
>> >solution is to suspend processes alternately until the problem is
>> >resolved.
>>
>> I've got an even better idea. Monitor each process's "working set" -
>> ie. the set of unique pages it regularly "uses" or pages in over some
>> period of (real) time. In the event of thrashing, processes should be
>> reserved an amount of physical RAM equal to their working set, except
>> for processes which have "unreasonably large" working sets.
>
>This may be a nice idea to move the thrashing point out a bit
>further, and as such may be nice in addition to the load control
>code.
Yes - in addition to, not instead of. Ultimately, there are workloads
which CANNOT be handled without suspending/killing some tasks...
>> It is still possible, mostly on small systems, to have *every* active
>> process thrashing in this manner. However, I would submit that if it
>> gets this far, the system can safely be considered overloaded. :)
>
>... And when the system _is_ overloaded, load control (ie. process
>suspension) is what saves us. Load control makes sure the processes
>in the system can all still make progress and the system can (slowly)
>work itself out of the overloaded situation.
Indeed: the whole problem is that under very heavy load, processes
simply cannot make progress - they will continue to thrash
indefinitely, and the only way out is to suspend or kill one or more
of the offending processes! Clever techniques to make that scenario
less likely to occur in the first place are nice, but we DO need an
"ultimate failsafe" here...
James.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-04-17 20:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-04-12 16:58 Slats Grobnik
2001-04-12 18:25 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-12 18:49 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-13 6:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-04-13 16:20 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-14 1:20 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-04-16 21:06 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-16 21:40 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-04-16 22:12 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-16 22:21 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-17 14:26 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-04-17 19:53 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-17 20:44 ` James A. Sutherland [this message]
2001-04-17 20:59 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-04-17 21:09 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-14 7:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-04-15 5:05 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-15 5:20 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-16 11:52 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-16 12:17 ` suspend processes at load (was Re: a simple OOM ...) Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-17 19:48 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-18 21:32 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-18 20:38 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-18 23:25 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-18 22:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-19 10:14 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-04-19 13:23 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-19 2:11 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-19 7:08 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-19 13:37 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-19 12:26 ` Christoph Rohland
2001-04-19 12:30 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-19 9:15 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-19 18:34 ` Dave McCracken
2001-04-19 18:47 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-19 18:53 ` Dave McCracken
2001-04-19 19:10 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-20 14:58 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-21 6:10 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-19 19:13 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-19 19:47 ` Gerrit Huizenga
2001-04-20 12:44 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-19 20:06 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-20 12:29 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-20 11:50 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-04-20 13:32 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-20 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-22 10:21 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-20 12:25 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-21 6:08 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-20 12:18 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-04-22 10:19 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-04-17 10:58 ` limit for number of processes Uman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0japdtkjmd12nfj5nplvb4m7n8otq3f8po@4ax.com \
--to=jas88@cam.ac.uk \
--cc=andrewm@uow.edu.au \
--cc=chromi@cyberspace.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kannzas@excite.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox