
Messages in this thread
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:53:55 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> wrote:

> > Hardly anyone will know to enable
> > it so the feature won't get much testing and this binary decision
> > fractures the testing effort. It would be much better if we can get
> > everyone running the same code. I mean, if there are certain workloads
> > on certain machines with which the oom-killer doesn't behave correctly
> > then fix it!
> Yes, I think you're right. But "breaking current behaviro of our servers!"
> arguments kills all proposal to this area and this oom-killer or vmscan is
> a feature should be tested by real users. (I'll write fork-bomb detector
> and RSS based OOM again.)

Well don't break their servers then ;)

What I'm not understanding is: why is it not possible to improve the
behaviour on the affected machines without affecting the behaviour on
other machines?

What are these "servers" to which you refer? x86_32 servers, I assume
- the patch shouldn't affect 64-bit machines. Why don't they also want
this treatment and in what way does the patch "break" them?

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-27 01:23    [W:0.069 / U:44.752 seconds]