Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 12:02:36 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>, Ivan <Ivan.Djelic@prism.uvsq.fr>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Out of swap handling and X lockups in 3.2R Message-ID: <37EAE9CC.99A4F4AF@newsguy.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9909221227080.312-100000@picnic.mat.net> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9909221024370.6368-100000@fw.wintelcom.net> <199909221727.LAA14290@mt.sri.com> <199909221738.KAA16257@apollo.backplane.com> <37E9AB80.C67E1B1D@newsguy.com> <199909231626.JAA27920@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "Thus, over the years my wife and I have physically diverged. While I have zoomed toward a crusty middle-age, she has instead clung doggedly to the sweet bloom of youth. Naturally I think this unfair. Yet, if it was the other way around, I confess I wouldn't be happy either." 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?37EAE9CC.99A4F4AF>