From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 16 11: 1:21 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5269415064 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:01:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) id CAA22116; Sat, 17 Apr 1999 02:58:52 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <371779F1.7D5C28C2@newsguy.com> Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 02:57:05 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Schwartz Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: swap-related problems References: <000e01be882f$8d6109e0$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org David Schwartz wrote: > > Not so. As soon as the system has overcommitted by one byte, not a single > 'critical' process will be able to allocate anything. In contrast, > non-critical processes will continue to be able to overcommit. Since we know > the system can remain stable in an overcommit situation (it does so now), > there is no reason to assume that overcommitting will ever have to lead to > any processes being killed. > > So long before critical processes can starve non-critical processes, the > reverse will occur. Ah, I see... you have a kind of point. You will find out, though, that no critical process will run, because the non-critical ones will long have overcommitted. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "Well, Windows works, using a loose definition of 'works'..." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message