Messages in this thread | | | From | "Peter T. Breuer" <> | Subject | Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...? | Date | Thu, 30 Mar 2000 13:50:29 +0200 (MET DST) |
| |
"A month of sundays ago ptb wrote:" > Horst von Brand wrote: > > has 128Mb RAM + 128Mb swap. With your scheme it won't even be able to > > I'll just comment that this is a fine mix, horst. I have 128+256 on > my main system - but I normally never go more than 30M into swap, and > that's for "resting" processes.
And I'll further comment ...
> Given that your system would be slow as molasses if it really was using > 100MB of swap for processes that it rotated through page-in frequently, > I suggest you allocate say 64MB for secure processes. That way you can > start 8 secure processes on your system, and the rest has 64MB of > normally accounted swap, plus the 128MB ram.
.. that if you really wanted a secure process, you'd take care to program it so that it didn't use 8MB of stack, and you'd take care to start it with a stack limit of something more reasonable, like maybe 100K. That way you only need to stake a claim to 100K of backing swap for that secure process, and no big deal all round.
Actually, I can think of one more process that I'd like to have as secure apart from init and cron .. the software watchdog. I kill apache regularly on servers anyway, just to keep it under control.
Peter
- 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/
| |