Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?

From: James Sutherland (jas88@cam.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Mar 20 2000 - 15:56:21 EST


On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:44:47 -0600 (CST), you wrote:

>James Sutherland <jas88@cam.ac.uk>
>> >It all depends on the application. I have seen embeded systems that
>> >could cause a loss of life on failure. I have worked on some that
>> >almost cost the job of the manager who sent it out.
>>
>> Definitely not the target market of the standard Linux kernel. While I
>> like Linux, I don't want to find myself on a penguin-powered life
>> support system. Equally, I don't want to run a mission-critical
>> embedded OS on my desktop PC.
>
>Which OS is more reliable a) Linux b) NT ?
Linux
>which OS is used to control a cruser with missles?
Neither, I hope. NT was tried and failed, IIRC.
>Which would you prefer: life support under NT, or life support under Linux?
Given that choice, I'll take my chances outside.

>> (Perhaps something like RTLinux could address these problems?)
>
>In some cases yes. In others it is not appropriate. Real-time, when measured
>in microseconds, is approprate for RTLinux. Where Real-time means "within
>an hour of the data arrival" it is not.

I mean, something like RTLinux would be the appropriate place for
specialist requirements like yours.

James.

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:30 EST