Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 04:00:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 04:00:39 -0400 Received: from denise.shiny.it ([194.20.232.1]:6302 "EHLO denise.shiny.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 04:00:38 -0400 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.7 on Linux X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 10:05:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Giuliano Pochini To: Jim Sibley Subject: RE: Killing/balancing processes when overcommited Cc: riel@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thunder from the hill Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1024 Lines: 30 > I still favor an installation file in /etc specifying the order in which > things are to be killed. Any alogrithmic assumptions are bound to fail at > some point to the dissatisfaction of the installation. I agree, I don't see any other solution. btw the thing is not simple. The oom killer should be able to comply instructions like: if (oom) kill netscape if it uses more than 80MB {stdprio 10} //sometimes if start sucking memory endlessly kill make and its childs if overall they use {stdprio 7} more than ...[cpu files memory] //ever tried to make -j bzImage on a 64MB box ? kill httpd if it's swapping too much {stdprio 3} ... Well, it's not simple. It must be planned carefully, or it will and up being as uneffective as the current killer is. Bye. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/