From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 12 13:48:45 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95BF616A4CE for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 13:48:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from multiplay.co.uk (www1.multiplay.co.uk [212.42.16.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF5D043D5C for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 13:48:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from vader ([212.135.219.179]) by multiplay.co.uk (multiplay.co.uk [212.42.16.7]) (MDaemon.PRO.v7.2.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001315975.msg for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:45:11 +0100 Message-ID: <011a01c53f66$4035aa00$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> From: "Steven Hartland" To: "ALeine" References: <200504121224.j3CCOFXL019177@marlena.vvi.at> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:48:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Spam-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:45:11 +0100 (not processed: message from valid local sender) X-MDRemoteIP: 212.135.219.179 X-Return-Path: killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:45:14 +0100 cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel killing processes when out of swap X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 13:48:45 -0000 Thanks for the feedback seems very strange that sshd was the first thing the kernel killed off; so unless it was actually at fault ( would be very strange ) it would have been one of the smallest not largest processes. The box has runs several 200M+ process and more 100M+ where as sshd is usually 6M. So this leads me to the questions: 1. Any know issues ssh which could make it eat memory? 2. Is there possibly a bug with the "large process detection"? N.B. It seems more likely that #2 is case as the next processes to be killed where some small perl monitoring scripts we run only after that did it kill of one of the large 200M+ processes. Regards Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "ALeine" > > This procedure is not random, it indeed looks for the largest process and > then kills it. It keeps repeating this procedure until the memory starvation > problem is solved. You obviously are not running X on that machine, otherwise > you would see that X would get killed before sshd. When you're out of swap, > you're also out of luck if sshd is among the largest processes on your > machine. Having a flag to tag processes as vital to prevent them from getting > killed (or to give them lower next-to-be-killed priority so that all non-vital > processes get killed first) when you run out of swap would be a useful feature, > what do you guys think? ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.