I'm not alone.
> You can still get to the point where you run out of disk space on your
> designated failsafe dynamic swap file partition, of course, but in between
> having to initially create that file and when it runs out of disk space
> there is a potential large measure of additional protection over the
> more draconian approaches.
>
> I'm not suggesting that anyone abandon good ideas for currying caches and
> so on, just suggestion a less scatter-shot approach to the worst case
> out-of-normal-memory situation.
>
I still like the fact that people are running aroudn going 'kill the bad
process' like the ieda of the kill is good, which it is not. YOu can't
just kill a process because it tries to use memory that is not there.
This is why I asked afore why xalloc() does not just return null and the
processes handle it from there.
And I get a 'well on some instances the memory may be requested but never
used'.
I think that with that something is seriously wrong. Why on earth woudl
someone design a program to request memory it will never use?
And then there's the 'evil process' scenario, where some user maliciously
eat all memory on the system. There should be a failsafe protecting the
system from a malicious userspace program. Is't there already.
Other than that, if you don't have the blessed memory, you obviously need
more.
-
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/