Re: [ATTEND][LSF/MM TOPIC] the memory controller

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Lord Glauber Costa of Sealand
<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * memcg/global oom handling: I believe that the OOM killer could be
> significantly improved to allow for more deterministic killing of tasks,
> specially in containers scenarios where memcg is heavily deployed. In
> some situations, a group encompasses a whole service, and under
> pressure, it would be better to shut down the group altogether with all
> its tasks, while in others it would be better to keep the current
> behavior of shooting down a single task.

We at Google have some OOM wish-list as well:
- having an option to kill the entire cgroup when a contained task is
selected to die;
- recursive setting of OOM kill priorities in a cgroup hierarchy

I am frankly not the best person to talk about this; however if this
topic was selected I could plan for it and bring on a few notes :)

-- 
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux