Re: [why oom_adj does not work] Re: Linux killed Kenny, ***!

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:50:58PM +0100, Bodo Eggert (7eggert@xxxxxx) wrote:

This does not work if processes are short-living and are spawned by the
parent on demand.

They will have the same name, too. Your Kenny-killer will fail, too.

It is not always the case, processes start executing different binaries
and change the names, that's at least what I observed in the particular
root case of the discussion.

In that case, you can use a wrapper script.

If processes have different priority in regards to oom
condition, this problem can not be solved with existing interfaces
without changing the application. So effectively there is no solution.

ACK, but being a child should count. Maybe the weight for childs should be
increased, if it does not do the right thing? Or maybe the childs do share
much (most of the) memory, so killing the parent is the right thing if you
want to free some RAM?

There could be lots of heuristics applied for the different cases, but
without changing the application, they are somewhat limited to
long-living processes only. There are really lots of cases when it does
not stand.

If it's short-lived enough, the processes will out-die the OOM-Killer.
You can only win by by suspending or killing the factory.
--
Why do men die before their wives?
They want to.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/