Kerin Millar <kerframil <at> fastmail.co.uk> writes:
> A new tunable, "oom_score_adj", was added, which accepts values between > 0 and 1000. > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/a63d83f#include/linux/oom.h FANTASTIC! Exactly the sort of info I'm looking for learn the pass, see what has been tried, how to configure it, and if it works/fails when and why! Absolutely wonderful link! > As mentioned there, the "oom_adj" tunable remains for reasons of > backward compatibility. Setting one will adjust the other per the > appropriate scale. That said, the mechanism seem too simple minded to succeed in anything but an extremely well monitored system. I think now the effort particularly in clustering codes, is to only have basis memory monitoring and control and leave the "fine grained" memory control needs to the clustering tools. The simple solution is there (in clustering) you just priortize jobs (codes), migrate to systems with spare resources, and bump other process to lower priority states. Also, there are (in-memory) codes like Apache-Spark, that use (RDD) Resilient Distributed Data. > It doesn't look as though Karthikesan's proposal for a cgroup based > controller was ever accepted. I think many of the old kernel ideas, accepted or not, are being "repackaged" in the clustering tools, or at least they are inspired by these codes.... Dude, YOU are the main{}. Keep the info flowing, as I'm sure lots of folks on this list are reading this ..... EXCELLENT! > --Kerin James
