> > Problem is that one's thing junk is other person's valuable thing.
> > Bottom line is that I don't belive any kind of AI in OMM will do the
> > right job.
> It beats killing totally random stuff like we do now.
> Can't you agree that the OOM killer, while not perfect,
> is better than the random killing we currently have?
Yes, but it still believe it remains a hack, not optimal solution.
.. and as they say 'hack last longest' once they get in.
I belive, ideally *user* should have some way to decide what should die.
Either by some reserved memory region where he can run ps, and kill,
ie analogy to reseved %5 of disk space. This space could include
only root prorgramsn further ones which are only attached to, say, tty1.
Or via some kernel interface like SysReq. It lets me list processes so all
is needed is just a feature to kill selected process (and ability of
system to suspend processes requesting more memory until memory becomes
available, or they get killed by user). Is this doable? I don't know.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:22 EST