Martin Buchholz wrote: > I confess to incomplete understanding of the situation on Linux, but... > I agree that the limit is artificial, > in that there is no doubling of actual memory. > It's a monitoring problem, whether internal to the linux kernel > or perhaps some other external software "accounting" entity. > Nevertheless, I believe this limit prevents a process currently using > 75% of memory from starting a small subprocess and > expect that clone() with CLONE_VM will fix that.
AFAIAA that should not happen. I'd be interested to try a test case. Andrew.
