[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: malloc() patches round 3

From: Jeroen Dekkers
Subject: Re: malloc() patches round 3
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:22:38 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.20i

On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:10:24PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> The problem is that I would *rather* have my kernel crash than have
> exim or apache start handing out error codes.  You're assuming that
> telling the user "memory is full" might fix the problem.  That means
> you're assuming that the user even knows what computer's memory is
> full!  Not so.  

What about carefully choose a process and kill that? If for example
mozilla starts eating memory, I don't want my system to reboot. I want
my system to kill mozilla instead. The process should be chosen carefully,
because you don't want an essiental task getting killed. The best way to
do it is to choose the process which uses the most memory and isn't one
of the essiental servers. Everything else keeps running then and the
process which is killed can be restarted if necessary.

Jeroen Dekkers

Attachment: pgpCH6Dxftzhs.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]