Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- From: David Schwartz <davids@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 24, 1:46 am, Jacek Dziedzic <jacek.dziedzic__no--
spa...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
How about: "There is an all-campus computer for the students to
run their email and compile and run simple c++ programs. This is
a small server machine, but there are hundreds of students using
it. Some students test their MPI programs, when these deadlock,
they leave tens of sleeping processes each. They do not utilize
the CPU, but clutter outputs of 'top', 'ps' and the like with,
in time, thousands of processes nobody needs. It would be good
to automatically kill such deadlocked processes in, say, 4 hours
rather than waiting for the next reboot."
Admittedly, one could do that with a simple script.
Yep, and such a script would be much more flexible and powerful. This
seems like a solution in search of a problem.
DS
.
- References:
- setrlimit() extension suggestion
- From: phil-news-nospam
- Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- From: phil-news-nospam
- Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- From: Jacek Dziedzic
- setrlimit() extension suggestion
- Prev by Date: Re: advice for 2.4 to 2.6 migration
- Next by Date: Re: Is it possible to get 100microsecond timer resolution using the CPU TSC?
- Previous by thread: Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- Next by thread: Re: setrlimit() extension suggestion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|