Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 18:20:46 -0400 From: Dan Swartzendruber <dswartz@druber.com> To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: dg@root.com, dag-erli@ifi.uio.no, stable@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: swap-leak in 2.2.5 ? Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980405182046.009137d0@mail.kersur.net> In-Reply-To: <199804052135.QAA00680@dyson.iquest.net> References: <3.0.5.32.19980405172640.00915e30@mail.kersur.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 04:35 PM 4/5/98 -0500, John S. Dyson wrote: >Dan Swartzendruber said: >> >> My only quibble with this technique is that it would seem to make it >> harder to tell if your machine is really running low on swap or not >> (e.g. swap as backing store for stack/heap/whatever *is* critical and >> allocation failure can cause application failure, whereas swap being >> used to cache random cruft is in the "who really cares" department). >> Or is there some way to tell the difference? >> >It is difficult not only to tell if you are low on swap, but also it >is hard to quantify being low on memory. I have been thinking about >this over the last year or so. It was actually kind of embarrassing. I convinced a local ISP to start converting their servers from Linux (what I recommended a few years ago when I didn't know different :)) One of the admins (who has some Linux experience) asked me why it was using swap. I gave the canonical reply. He asked the question I just posed. I had no good reply :( To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.5.32.19980405182046.009137d0>