From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Sep 26 20:37: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 680AD157AE for ; Sun, 26 Sep 1999 20:37:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id UAA76806; Sun, 26 Sep 1999 20:36:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 20:36:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199909270336.UAA76806@apollo.backplane.com> To: "Daniel C. Sobral" Cc: Nate Williams , Alfred Perlstein , Chuck Robey , Ivan , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Out of swap handling and X lockups in 3.2R References: <199909221727.LAA14290@mt.sri.com> <199909221738.KAA16257@apollo.backplane.com> <37E9AB80.C67E1B1D@newsguy.com> <199909231626.JAA27920@apollo.backplane.com> <37EAE9CC.99A4F4AF@newsguy.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG : :Matthew Dillon wrote: :> :> What it all comes down to is a juxtaposition of what people believe :> is appropriate verses what people are actually willing to code up. :> I'm willing to code up my importance mechanism idea. The question is :> whether it's a good enough idea to throw into the tree. : :I think it's a good idea. It lets the admin introduce bias in the :system to protect people/processes who are more likely to use huge :amount of memory. Alas, taking the swap space into account in :addition to RSS seems more important to me. But then, I'm happy with :the way things are right now. : :-- :Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) I'm going to implement and commit this idea into -CURRENT unless someone screams. I think it would be an excellent base on top of which future sohpistication can be added. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message