From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 21 06:32:51 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50DCE106566C for ; Thu, 21 May 2009 06:32:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com) Received: from shell.rawbw.com (shell.rawbw.com [198.144.192.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 247FE8FC1C for ; Thu, 21 May 2009 06:32:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com) Received: from eagle.syrec.org (ppp-71-139-35-171.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [71.139.35.171]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell.rawbw.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n4L6WoZV015095 for ; Wed, 20 May 2009 23:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A14F58F.8000801@rawbw.com> Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 23:32:47 -0700 From: Yuri User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090419) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Why kernel kills processes that run out of memory instead of just failing memory allocation system calls? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: yuri@rawbw.com List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 06:32:51 -0000 Seems like failing system calls (mmap and sbrk) that allocate memory is more graceful and would allow the program to at least issue the reasonable error message. And more intelligent programs would be able to reduce used memory instead of just dying. Yuri