[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <484180C7.3040701@student.cs.york.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 17:45:59 +0100
From: Alan Jenkins <aj504@...dent.cs.york.ac.uk>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: Alan Jenkins <aj504@...york.ac.uk>,
Chris Frey <cdfrey@...rsquare.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: OOM policy, overcommit control, and soft limits
Alan Cox wrote:
>> In other words, I reckon I have on the order of a gigabyte of virtual
>> address space, which has been malloc'ed or equivalent, but is not used
>> and therefore requires no memory resource (ram or swap).
>>
>
> No need to reckon. The committed_as in the proc file should give a rough
> value.
>
> Alan
>
Thanks for the education. I shall read up on the other numbers in
/proc/meminfo as well.
In that case I was overly pessimistic. I was only committed around the
512M mark. It jumps up to 750M if I open Amarok and Firefox though. At
times I've run more - I would guess I can contrive combinations which go
above 1000M.
I've not had an OOM event on this machine. I have had runaway
development-related loads, causing thrashing (hitting swap) out of
control, but I can't really comment. I don't remember what caused it
exactly. Plus I'm swapping to a Flash drive; a Flash specific IO
scheduler might have coped better (than noop) and made it easier to recover.
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists