Re: [discuss] memrlimit - potential applications that can use

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>]

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:55:52 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> >>> So, before we expand the use of those features to control groups by
> >>> adding a bunch of new code, let's make sure that there will be users
> >> for
> >>> it and that those users have no better way of doing it.
> >> I am all ears to better ways of doing it. Are you suggesting that overcommit was
> >> added even though we don't actually need it?
> > 
> > It serves a purpose, certainly.  We have have better ways of doing it
> > now, though.  "i>>?So, before we expand the use of those features to
> > control groups by adding a bunch of new code, let's make sure that there
> > will be users for it and that those users have no better way of doing
> > it."
> > 
> > The one concrete user that's been offered so far is postgres.  I've
> 
> No, you've been offered several, including php and apache that use memory limits.
> 
> > suggested something that I hope will be more effective than enforcing
> > overcommit.  
> 

I'm sorry I miss the point. My concern on memrlimit (for overcommiting) is that
it's not fair because an application which get -ENOMEM at mmap() is just someone
unlucky. I think it's better to trigger some notifier to application or daemon
rather than return -ENOMEM at mmap(). Notification like "Oh, it seems the VSZ
of total application exceeds the limit you set. Although you can continue your
operation, it's recommended that you should fix up the  situation".
will be good.

Thanks,
-Kame

--
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-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>