Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 12:44:01 -0600 From: lyndon@orthanc.ab.ca To: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Swap overcommit (was Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2)) Message-ID: <199907141844.MAA05368@orthanc.ab.ca> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Jul 1999 14:41:12 EDT." <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907141440190.12940-100000@janus.syracuse.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You don't seem to understand that a runaway process/one designed just > to take up memory will be much more active than your little IMAP servers, > and be the one killed, if this scheme were used. No, what I don't understand is how the current behaviour can tell that my temporary and *valid* need for a large chunk of memory does not make me a runaway process, and therefore subject to death. --lyndon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199907141844.MAA05368>