Requesting 'real' memory
Posted Feb 4, 2008 9:43 UTC (Mon) by giraffedata
In reply to: Requesting 'real' memory
Parent article: Avoiding the OOM killer with mem_notify
but it does support a global overallocation/no-overallocation switch,
and it's obvious what it would mean to take that switch and make it process-granular.
That would be only slightly different from the scheme I described. The only difference is that the global switch lets you add a specified amount of real memory to the size of swap space in calculating the quota. If you could stop the kernel from locking up that amount of real memory for other things, you could have the OOM-proof process we're talking about, with less swap space.
I think the only reason I haven't seen it done that way is that swap space is too cheap to make it worthwhile to bring in the complexity of allocating the real memory. If I were to use the Linux global switch, I would just tell it to consider 0% of the real memory and throw some extra disk space at it, for that reason.
What happens in your scheme if someone is running without swap? I bet there are
people in this thread who both disable overallocation and run without swap
They don't have that option. The price they pay to have zero swap space is that nothing is ever guaranteed to be free from being OOM-killed. Which is also the case for the Linux users today who disable overallocation and run without swap.
to post comments)