From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jul 31 10:51:14 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA13000 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:51:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA12991 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:51:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by root.com (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA01836; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:50:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199607311750.KAA01836@root.com> X-Authentication-Warning: implode.root.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Juri Tsibrovski cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Considering FreeBSD In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:54:20 +0400." <2.2.32.19960731165420.007dcc38@myth.sw.ru> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:50:42 -0700 Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> The worst that will happen is that the system will hang due to virtual >>memory exhaustion. You should not increase it to >99, however, as 100 is >>the starting point after it wraps at 30000 and thus may protect processes >>that shouldn't be protected. > >What can prevent me from increasing that number too? I already run modified >kernel with pids protected <250, and changed to 300 wrapping point. Nothing - that's fine. >> The whole thing is admittedly somewhat of a kludge, but it actually handles >>about 98% of the failure cases and is a far better solution (killing off the >>process that faults when VM is exhausted) than hanging or crashing the system. > >In some cases (exactly what happened with me) I'd elect system crash with >restart rather than have all our modem pool unusable till morning :) Well, this whole thing is becoming an issue for you because you're running out of swap space. The real solution may be to find out why and fix it. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project