Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161143AbWJDOWE (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2006 10:22:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161140AbWJDOWD (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2006 10:22:03 -0400 Received: from [83.101.154.115] ([83.101.154.115]:39296 "EHLO raad.intranet") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161009AbWJDOWB (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2006 10:22:01 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: System hang problem. Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 17:24:12 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200610041724.12514.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 934 Lines: 27 Manish Neema wrote: > > What you can often do, if you have one application using much memory, > > is limiting *this application's* memory usage with ulimit. If the > > application correctly handles malloc()==NULL, then at least your > > system will behave stably. > > The problem is its different application, different user each time (a > typical large R&D environment). /etc/security/limits.conf allows to set > max resident set size. Is there a way to limit based on the total > virtual size? You mean like: ulimit -v [total VMsize/runqueue] I suppose, that this could easily be dynamically calculated by the kernel, for a tremendously inhibiting OOM-killer effect. Thanks! -- Al - 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/