From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Another question about thrashing
Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 10:20:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EB7C490.5040803@techsource.com> (raw)
There didn't seem to be much interest in my earlier post about kernel
behavior when swap thrashing.
So my question is, are we not concerned about system behavior when one
process uses so much memory that it grinds everything else to a halt?
It appears that a thrashing process is being given more preferential
treatment than it should.
next reply other threads:[~2003-05-06 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-06 14:20 Timothy Miller [this message]
2003-05-06 22:18 ` Another question about thrashing William Lee Irwin III
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3EB7C490.5040803@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).