From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 21:26:37 +0200 (MET DST) From: Szabolcs Szakacsits Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prevent OOM from killing init In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Alan Cox Cc: Stephen Clouse , Guest section DW , Rik van Riel , Patrick O'Rourke , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > One of the things that we badly need to resurrect for 2.5 is the > beancounter work which would let you reasonably do things like > guaranteed Oracle a certain amount of the machine, or restrict all > the untrusted users to a total of 200Mb hard limit between them etc This would improve Linux reliability but it could be much better with added *optional* non-overcommit (most other OS also support this, also that's the default mostly [please no, "but it deadlocks" because it's not true, they also kill processes (Solaris, etc)]), reserved superuser memory (ala Solaris, True64, etc when OOM in non-overcommit, users complain and superuser acts, not the OS killing their tasks) and superuser *advisory* OOM killer [there was patch for this before], I think in the last area Linux is already more ahead than others at present. About the "use resource limits!". Yes, this is one solution. The *expensive* solution (admin time, worse resource utilization, etc). Others make it cheaper mixing with the above ones. Szaka -- 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/