Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 Mar 2000 07:40:44 -0600 (CST) | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: Overcomittable memory (Was: Linux 2.2.15pre12) |
| |
--------- Received message begins Here ---------
> > Den 06-Mar-00 16:29:18 skrev Rik van Riel følgende om "Re: Linux 2.2.15pre12": > > > Think about running a big simulation process that fork()s to > > exec() /bin/mail in order to email its status or a partial > > solution to the person that started the simulation. > > > A big rendering process that fork()/exec()s lpr. > > > Without overcommit you'd need to have the 500 MB of swap free > > that the big simulation is using, even though it'll only use > > 1 MB for the little process that's being exec()ed... > > This doesn't mean that overcommit is a good idea. It just means that > fork()/exec() is not a good way of launching programs. Using overcommit to > cover up for fork()/exec() deficiencies is like redirecting compiler > warnings to /dev/null instead of fixing the code. The symptoms become less > visible but the problem remains. The problem could be solved by introducing > a new system call with the ability to start an external program as a new > process.
Or an option to fork to never allocate memory, cleared on exec of course. This becomes the equivalent to a "vfork". ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesse I Pollard, II Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |