From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Aug 19 10:44:39 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E8EEBBFE0C for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:44:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@sohara.org) Received: from smtp1.irishbroadband.ie (smtp1.irishbroadband.ie [62.231.32.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F118418B8 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:44:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@sohara.org) Received: from [89.127.62.20] (helo=smtp.lan.sohara.org) by smtp1.irishbroadband.ie with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1bahHp-0005TV-PM for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:44:29 +0100 Received: from [192.168.63.1] (helo=steve.lan.sohara.org) by smtp.lan.sohara.org with smtp (Exim 4.86_2 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1bahIA-0009BC-FI for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:44:50 +0000 Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:44:29 +0100 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How do I limit I/O usage for a user/process? A user broke my system Message-Id: <20160819114429.756b3d25f9335417a0c673c3@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: <20160819101657.GB2560@hephaistos.local> References: <20160819104058.1c60a63fb832fbdc1524207c@sohara.org> <20160819101657.GB2560@hephaistos.local> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.24.29; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:44:39 -0000 On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:16:57 +0200 "Martin S. Weber" wrote: > On 2016-08-19 10:40:58, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > (...) > > Very likely the problem was due to memory use and you are tight > > on memory for your normal load. > > Which, as I might add, *should* be the normal usage pattern of a box. You want all the memory in use I agree, but you don't want it so tight that there is constant memory pressure so there should be a goodly amount inactive, in cache and buffers. If there is swap activity then you are too tight for the load. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/