| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller |
| From: | David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:44:33 +1100 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20051213015829.GE23384@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20051207183531.5c13e8c5.masaki-c@xxxxxxxxxx> <20051208070841.GJ501696@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051209104148.346f2ff5.masaki-c@xxxxxxxxxx> <20051212014633.GC19154461@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <p73bqzmpx2f.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051213013204.GW501696@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051213015829.GE23384@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.1i |
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 02:58:29AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Well, if you can define "available memory" in any sane way in > > the context we are operating in then that would work. > > Just total memory. XFS uses that already for some things. > Not 100% bullet proof, but a reasonable approximation Ok. That's along the lines that I was thinking of as well. Thanks, Andi...... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner R&D Software Enginner SGI Australian Software Group |
| Previous by Date: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |