> It appears that option 2 would be the best for me, so I set: sysctl
> vm.overcommit_memory=2
>
> However, it resets to 0 on reboot, and only root can reset it.
> It would be good if it would be set to 2 on reboot. Is there
> a good way to do this? I suppose I could put something in
> /etc/i
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 12:52:51AM +, Michael D. Berger wrote:
> It appears that option 2 would be the best for me, so I set:
> sysctl vm.overcommit_memory=2
>
> However, it resets to 0 on reboot, and only root can reset it.
> It would be good if it would be set to 2 on reboot. Is there
> a g
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 15:03:34 -0500, Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:55:57PM +, Michael D. Berger wrote:
[...]
>
> /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
> (or sysctl vm.overcommit_memory)
>
>>From the kernel Documentation:
>
> This value contains a flag that enables memory overco
On Mar 3, 2011, at 2:21 PM, "Michael D. Berger"
wrote:
> In a context where exceptions are caught, I ran
> the fragment:
>
> cerr << "allocating" << endl;
> char*arr[100];
> for (int jj = 0; jj < 10; ++jj)
> {
> cerr << "jj = " << jj << endl;
> arr[jj] = new char[2
On 3/3/2011 2:26 PM, Michael D. Berger wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 15:03:34 -0500, Stephen Harris wrote:
>
>
>>
>> /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
>> (or sysctl vm.overcommit_memory)
>>
>> > From the kernel Documentation:
>>
>> This value contains a flag that enables memory overcommitment.
>>
>> Wh
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 15:03:34 -0500, Stephen Harris wrote:
>
> /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
> (or sysctl vm.overcommit_memory)
>
>>From the kernel Documentation:
>
> This value contains a flag that enables memory overcommitment.
>
> When this flag is 0, the kernel attempts to estimate the am
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
>
> Yes, I do expect to do a bit of arithmetic. I will need
> several blocks of about 0.5G, and I am checking the limits.
> Is it true, then, that I won't really know if I succeeded with
> the allocation until I try to write the memory? What will
> happen then? Is
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:55:57PM +, Michael D. Berger wrote:
> Yes, I do expect to do a bit of arithmetic. I will need
> several blocks of about 0.5G, and I am checking the limits.
> Is it true, then, that I won't really know if I succeeded with
> the allocation until I try to write the memo
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:38:52 -0500, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
[...]
>
> Holy RAMbo, batman! How many GB of RAM do you intend to allocate? Once
> you allocate 2GB like you did, you MUST be running a bigmem or x64
> kernel to allocate another 2GB.
>
> You won't see 'new'd memory as "taken" in top(
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:34:13 -0500, m.roth-x6lchVBUigD1P9xLtpHBDw wrote:
> Michael D. Berger wrote:
>> In a context where exceptions are caught, I ran the fragment:
>>
>>cerr << "allocating" << endl;
>>char*arr[100];
>>for (int jj = 0; jj < 10; ++jj)
>>{
>
>> Wherein do I err?
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
> In a context where exceptions are caught, I ran
> the fragment:
>
>cerr << "allocating" << endl;
>char*arr[100];
>for (int jj = 0; jj < 10; ++jj)
>{
> cerr << "jj = " << jj << endl;
> arr[jj] = new char[2,000,000,000]; // This line
Michael D. Berger wrote:
> In a context where exceptions are caught, I ran
> the fragment:
>
>cerr << "allocating" << endl;
>char*arr[100];
>for (int jj = 0; jj < 10; ++jj)
>{
> Wherein do I err?
It would have been caught on 0 if that was jj++, *not* ++jj (increment
*after* th
In a context where exceptions are caught, I ran
the fragment:
cerr << "allocating" << endl;
char*arr[100];
for (int jj = 0; jj < 10; ++jj)
{
cerr << "jj = " << jj << endl;
arr[jj] = new char[20];
sleep (30);
}
sleep (10);
for (int jj = 0; jj < 10;
13 matches
Mail list logo
