On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 4:57 AM Roberto Ragusa <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 1/5/20 12:38 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:51 AM Aleksandra Fedorova <alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Since in the Change we are not introducing just the earlyoom tool but enable it with a specific profile I would add those details here. Smth like: > >> > >> "earlyoom service will choose the offending process based on the same oom_score as kernel uses. It will send a SIGTERM signal on 10% of RAM left, and SIGKILL on 5%" > > > > I add this information to the summary. Also, I think these numbers may > > need to change to avoid prematurely sending SIGTERM when the system > > has no swap device. > I read that sentence in a different way: > "earlyoom will make only 90% of your RAM available, > so it is effectively using 10% of your RAM". > > On my 32GB laptop that means 3.2GB of RAM gets unusable. > And on my 64GB machine I'm being robbed of 6.4GB. Wow. > > How low can these numbers be pushed? Even 3% would be 1GB out of 32GB. What you say is only true in the case of systems with no swap. That's mentioned in the proposal. If swap is being used, for sure essentially all of your RAM is being used, so it's swap that's the determining factor. If you don't have swap, yes RAM becomes the determining factor and I agree that on systems with a lot of RAM, 10% is too high. The ideal scenario is to not run earlyoom at all on systems that do not have a swap device. They're not going to run into the responsivity problem anyway, which is a direct consequence of heavy swapping. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
