Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Mar 2002 18:20:27 -0500 | From | Benjamin LaHaise <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Arch option to touch newly allocated pages |
| |
On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 12:14:15AM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On March 6, 2002 05:36 pm, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 04:24:17PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > On March 6, 2002 04:24 pm, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:59:22PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > > > Suppose you have 512 MB memory and an equal amount of swap. You start 8 > > > > > umls with 64 MB each. With your and Peter's suggestion, the system always > > > > > goes into swap. Whereas if the memory is only allocated on demand it > > > > > probably doesn't. > > > > > > > > As I said previously, going into swap is preferable over randomly killing > > > > new tasks under heavy load. > > > > > > Huh? In the example I gave, you will never oom but with your suggestion, you > > > will always go needlessly go into swap. I'm suprised that you and Peter are > > > aguing in favor of wasting resources. > > > > I'm arguing in favour of predictable behaviour. Stability and reliability > > are more important than a bit of swap space. > > That's the same argument that says memory overcommit should not be allowed.
Go back in the thread: I suggested making it an option that the user has to turn on to allow his foot to be shot. Remember: the common case in the kernel is to be using all memory.
-ben -- "A man with a bass just walked in, and he's putting it down on the floor." - 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/
| |