David Fetter <david@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 04:43:14PM -0800, Richard Troy wrote: >> ... different in my opinion if only Unix didn't have this asenine view >> that the choice between a memory management strategy that kills >> random processes and turning that off and accepting that your system >> hangs is a reasonable choice and that spending a measily % of >> performance in overhead to eliminate the problem is out of the >> question. Asenine, I tell you. > The OOM killer in Linux is, indeed, asinine. Well, it probably has some use for desktop systems, or would if it could distinguish essential from inessential processes. But please Richard: Linux is not Unix, it's merely one implementation of a Unix-ish system. You are tarring *BSD, Solaris, HPUX, and a bunch of others with a failing that is not theirs. regards, tom lane
