From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from burns.conectiva (burns.conectiva [10.0.0.4]) by postfix.conectiva.com.br (Postfix) with SMTP id C07C416B17 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:08:01 -0300 (EST) Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:06:56 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH] OOM handling In-Reply-To: <3ABDF8A6.7580BD7D@evision-ventures.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Martin Dalecki Cc: Alan Cox , "James A. Sutherland" , Guest section DW , Patrick O'Rourke , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote: > Ah... and of course I think this patch can already go directly > into the official kernel. The quality of code should permit > it. I would esp. request Rik van Riel to have a closer look > at it... - the algorithms are just as much black magic as the old ones - it hasn't been tested in any other workload than your Oracle server (at least, not that I've heard of) - the comments are just too rude ;) (though fun) - the AGE_FACTOR calculation will overflow after the system has an uptime of just _3_ days - your code might be good for server loads, but for normal users it will kill what amounts to a random process ... this is horribly wrong for desktop systems In short, I like some of your ideas, but I really fail to see why this version of the code would be any better than what we're having now. In fact, since there seem to be about 1000x more desktop boxes than Oracle boxes (probably even more), I'd say that the current algorithm in the kernel is better (since it's right for more systems). Now if you can make something which preserves the heuristics which serve us so well on desktop boxes and add something that makes it also work on your Oracle servers, then I'd be interested. Alternatively, I also wouldn't mind a completely new algorithm, as long as it turns out to work well on desktop boxes too. But remember that we cannot tell this without first testing the thing on a few dozen (hundreds?) of machines with different workloads... regards, Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/ -- 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/