On Tue 15-04-14 09:38:10, Glyn Normington wrote:Thanks Michal - very helpful!
On 14/04/2014 21:50, Johannes Weiner wrote:This depends on the kernel version. OOM with a lot of dirty pages on
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:11:25AM +0100, Glyn Normington wrote:We are repeatedly seeing a situation where a memory cgroup with a given
Johannes/MichalAs Tejun said, memory cgroups *do* respond to internal pressure and
What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you see this as a valid
requirement?
enter targetted reclaim before invoking the OOM killer. So I'm not
exactly sure what you are asking.
memory limit results in an application process in the cgroup being killed
oom during application initialisation. One theory is that dirty file cache
pages are not being written to disk to reduce memory consumption before the
oom killer is invoked. Should memory cgroups' response to internal pressure
include writing dirty file cache pages to disk?
memcg LRUs was a big problem. Now we are waiting for pages under
writeback during reclaim which should prevent from such spurious OOMs.
Which kernel versions are we talking about? The fix (or better said
workaround) I am thinking about is e62e384e9da8 memcg: prevent OOM with
too many dirty pages.
I won't waste your time with the details of our setup unless the problem recurs with e62e384e9da8 in place.
I am still not sure I understand your setup and the problem. Could you
describe your setup (what runs where under what limits), please?