On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 11:27:18PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 04:19:55PM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> > > 3. add the out of memory killer, which has been tuned with
> > > -test9 to be ran at exactly the right moment; process
> > > selection: "principle of least surprise" <== OOM handling
>
> I've tested v2.4.0test9+RielVMpatch now, together with the
> memory_static program. It works terrific. No innocent process got
> killed, just the offending one. And not until the memory was completely
> depleted.
More tests conducted:
16MB memory, 32MB swapfile + 64MB swappartition (in that order)
16MB memory, 64MB swappartition + 32MB swapfile
16MB memory, 64MB swappartition
16MB memory, 32MB swapfile
16MB memory, NO swap
64MB memory, 256MB swappartition
64MB memory, NO swap
All survives just fine.
I can't do anything else while running the memory-eater program
(this is via ssh; haven't tried locally), but when it finally gets
killed, everything works ok again.
/David
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 06 2000 - 19:23:31 EDT