On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > The oom killer avoided killing your busy, large, root-owned
> > process. Don't run gcc compiles as root. Protecting root
> > processes is an explicit design goal here.
>
> Also:
>
> 1) his system pretty much continued to run
> 2) since only httpd
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Stephen Tweedie wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:02:52AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
>
> > I am very unimpressed with the current OOM killer. After 10 days of online
> > time, I decided to try compiling gcc again, the very culprit that killed my
> > last system using
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Stephen Tweedie wrote:
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:02:52AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
I am very unimpressed with the current OOM killer. After 10 days of online
time, I decided to try compiling gcc again, the very culprit that killed my
last system using
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
The oom killer avoided killing your busy, large, root-owned
process. Don't run gcc compiles as root. Protecting root
processes is an explicit design goal here.
Also:
1) his system pretty much continued to run
2) since only httpd children got
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:02:52AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
> I am very unimpressed with the current OOM killer. After 10 days of online
> time, I decided to try compiling gcc again, the very culprit that killed my
> last system using 2.4.0-test8 Friday night (to which I was unable to
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:02:52AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
> I am very unimpressed with the current OOM killer.
[...]
> We need to decide on a better algorithm,
> albeit simple, that will alleviate this problem before 2.4.0 final comes out.
We don't need to decide on one, you can provide
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:02:52AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
I am very unimpressed with the current OOM killer.
[...]
We need to decide on a better algorithm,
albeit simple, that will alleviate this problem before 2.4.0 final comes out.
We don't need to decide on one, you can provide and
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:02:52AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
I am very unimpressed with the current OOM killer. After 10 days of online
time, I decided to try compiling gcc again, the very culprit that killed my
last system using 2.4.0-test8 Friday night (to which I was unable to
8 matches
Mail list logo