On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 4:54 AM Lukas Märdian wrote:
>
> Am 14.06.22 um 01:22 schrieb Nick Rosbrook:
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 8:19 AM Lukas Märdian wrote:
> >> I wonder if we could use a more selective approach, though, using
> >> "OOMScoreAdjust=" in the systemd.exec environment (i.e. Gnome-S
On Mon, Jun 13 2022 at 14:18:53 +0200, Lukas Märdian
wrote:
Am 10.06.22 um 12:17 schrieb Sebastien Bacher:
Le 10/06/2022 à 11:40, Julian Andres Klode a écrit :
The bug reports we see show that systemd-oomd is working correctly:
The browser gets killed, the system remains responsive without
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 06:23:46PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 03:47:58PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:16:15PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 09/06/2022 à 21:19, Dan Streetman a écrit :
> > Personally, I think this is the correct option.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 03:47:58PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:16:15PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > Le 09/06/2022 à 21:19, Dan Streetman a écrit :
> > > Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a good
> > > default swap size.
> >
> > Did we ever co
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:16:15PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
Le 09/06/2022 à 21:19, Dan Streetman a écrit :
Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a good
default swap size.
Did we ever consider doing the same than fedora is doing there?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 8:19 AM Lukas Märdian wrote:
> I wonder if we could use a more selective approach, though, using
> "OOMScoreAdjust=" in the systemd.exec environment (i.e. Gnome-Shell
> launcher in Ubuntu's context, as sd-oomd is currently only enabled on
> Ubuntu Desktop) [2], to reduce th
Am 14.06.22 um 01:22 schrieb Nick Rosbrook:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 8:19 AM Lukas Märdian wrote:
I wonder if we could use a more selective approach, though, using
"OOMScoreAdjust=" in the systemd.exec environment (i.e. Gnome-Shell
launcher in Ubuntu's context, as sd-oomd is currently only enabl
Am 10.06.22 um 12:17 schrieb Sebastien Bacher:
Le 10/06/2022 à 11:40, Julian Andres Klode a écrit :
The bug reports we see show that systemd-oomd is working correctly:
The browser gets killed, the system remains responsive without having
become unresponsive as would be the usual case.
It might
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 2:16 PM Sebastien Bacher wrote:
>
> Le 09/06/2022 à 21:19, Dan Streetman a écrit :
> > Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a good
> > default swap size.
>
> Did we ever consider doing the same than fedora is doing there?
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 11:25 AM Steve Langasek
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 11:40:52AM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> > > > I think that either option (1) or (3) would be the most reasonable --
> > > > maybe trying (1
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 4:05 PM Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > > 4. Increase swap on Ubuntu. I am adding this for completeness, but I
> > > doubt this is a viable option.
>
> > Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a
Hi,
I'm part of the team that worked on the Fedora Change Proposal that
enabled systemd-oomd by default:
ht
hi,
Am Freitag, dem 10.06.2022 um 20:16 +0200 schrieb Sebastien Bacher:
> Le 09/06/2022 à 21:19, Dan Streetman a écrit :
> > Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a good
> > default swap size.
>
> Did we ever consider doing the same than fedora is doing there?
>
> https://fed
Le 09/06/2022 à 21:19, Dan Streetman a écrit :
Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a good
default swap size.
Did we ever consider doing the same than fedora is doing there?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SwapOnZRAM
Cheers,
Sebastien Bacher
--
ubuntu-devel mail
Le 10/06/2022 à 17:52, Julian Andres Klode a écrit :
but I think the main
problem is that there is no desktop integration telling the user
why something was killed so they assume malfunction.
If we had a popup after an oom event saying
The application firefox was closed to maintain system pe
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:24:41AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 11:40:52AM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> > > > I think that either option (1) or (3) would be the most reasonable --
> > > > maybe tr
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 11:40:52AM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > > I think that either option (1) or (3) would be the most reasonable --
> > > maybe trying (1) first and falling back to (3) if necessary. If anyone
> > > has a
On Jun 9 2022, at 2:19 pm, Dan Streetman wrote:
> Was systemd-oomd enabled by default for a specific reason? The kernel
> is quite able to handle oom situations itself, and has been for years,
> so while I'm not trying to suggest systemd-oomd is without any use
> case, I'm skeptical that systemd-o
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 5:21 AM Ernst Sjöstrand wrote:
>
> Den fre 10 juni 2022 kl 07:36 skrev Olivier Tilloy
> :
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 1:49 AM Steve Langasek
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 01:00:45PM -0400, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
>>> > In the reports I refer to above, ap
Den fre 10 juni 2022 kl 07:36 skrev Olivier Tilloy <
olivier.til...@canonical.com>:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 1:49 AM Steve Langasek
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 01:00:45PM -0400, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
>> > In the reports I refer to above, applications are being killed due to
>> > (1)
Le 10/06/2022 à 11:40, Julian Andres Klode a écrit :
The bug reports we see show that systemd-oomd is working correctly:
The browser gets killed, the system remains responsive without having
become unresponsive as would be the usual case.
It might be working 'correctly' but is not perceived as
On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> >
> > I think that either option (1) or (3) would be the most reasonable --
> > maybe trying (1) first and falling back to (3) if necessary. If anyone
> > has an opinion on this, or can think of other options, I would
> > appreciat
On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 01:00:45PM -0400, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> Hi,
>
> During the 22.04 cycle, we enabled systemd-oomd [1] by default on
> desktop. Since then, there have been reports of systemd-oomd killing
> user applications too frequently (e.g. browsers, IDEs, and gnome-shell
> in some cases
Hi,
On Thu, 9 Jun 2022 at 20:20, Dan Streetman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:03 PM Nick Rosbrook
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > During the 22.04 cycle, we enabled systemd-oomd [1] by default on
> > desktop. Since then, there have been reports of systemd-oomd killing
> > user applications too
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 1:49 AM Steve Langasek
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 01:00:45PM -0400, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> > In the reports I refer to above, applications are being killed due to
> > (1). In practice, the SwapUsedLimit might be too easy to reach on
> > Ubuntu, largely because Ubuntu
On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 01:00:45PM -0400, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> In the reports I refer to above, applications are being killed due to
> (1). In practice, the SwapUsedLimit might be too easy to reach on
> Ubuntu, largely because Ubuntu provides just 1GB of swap. Since we
> follow the suggestion of
On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > 4. Increase swap on Ubuntu. I am adding this for completeness, but I
> > doubt this is a viable option.
> Personally, I think this is the correct option. 1GB is not a good
> default swap size.
Could you elaborate why? This defaul
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:03 PM Nick Rosbrook
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> During the 22.04 cycle, we enabled systemd-oomd [1] by default on
> desktop. Since then, there have been reports of systemd-oomd killing
> user applications too frequently (e.g. browsers, IDEs, and gnome-shell
> in some cases). In add
28 matches
Mail list logo
