[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B73206C.8090108@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:09:00 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@...e.cz>
CC: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: Improving OOM killer
On 02/10/2010 03:54 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> Simply computing the cost of the whole children subtree (or a reasonable
> approximation) avoids the need for any magic numbers and gives a much better
> representation of how costly the subtree is, since, well, it is the cost
> itself.
That assumes you want to kill off that entire tree.
You will not want to do that when a web server or
database server runs out of memory, because the
goal of the OOM killer is to allow the system to
continue to run and be useful. This means keeping
the services available...
--
All rights reversed.
--
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