On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:51:32PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:27:41AM +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > >I have long lived processes that continuously handle very valuable > >data and potentially get very large (several GB). I'd like that > >process to be able to make a rational decision about what happens to its > >memory contents when an allocation fails rather than having the > >proverbial rug pulled out from under it. Rug pulling at any point > >can cost an annual salary or two. > > If you google for freebsd+sigdanger, you will find that this topic > was first discussed nearly 10 years ago. Unfortunately, no progress > appears to have been made, though it crops up every few years. I need to make a slight correction there: some time ago the patch at the http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/overcommit/index.html works, at least I believe so. I implemented overcommit turn-off knob and did the exact anonymous memory accounting. Quite possible, the code rotten since then.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:24 UTC