64bits is not an option cause we have some applications (homemade) that are not 64bits compatible, there's a chance to migrate them to 64 but nothing in the short term. I configured the kernel to use less memory now, so ill see how it goes and ill post my results. cheers, C On 8/20/07, Eric Sisler <esisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 12:06 -0400, Cristian Silva wrote: > > > Sorry, forgot to mention that we are getting the oom-killer with another > > application, we are not using VMware. > > The actual application is pretty much irrelevant once the oom-killer is > involved. > > > The total low memory reported by the PAE and the normal kernel are the > same > > > > PAE > > # free -lm > > total used free shared buffers > cached > > Mem: 7994 348 7646 0 > 70 179 > > Low: 827 102 724 > > High: 7167 245 6922 > > -/+ buffers/cache: 98 7896 > > Swap: 4094 0 4094 > > # > > > > > > Normal > > # free -lm > > total used free shared buffers > cached > > Mem: 3930 309 3621 0 > 17 196 > > Low: 859 47 811 > > High: 3071 261 2810 > > -/+ buffers/cache: 95 3835 > > Swap: 4094 0 4094 > > # > > > > Both commands were executed just after a reboot of the system and it's > > interesting to see that the used low memory in the PAE kernel is the > double > > of the used low memory in a "normal" kernel > > There's also slightly less low memory when running PAE, but obviously > way more high memory since the regular kernel is limited to 4Gb. My > understanding is that the PAE kernel *should* be roughly equivalent to > the RHEL4 hugemem kernel, but unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the > case. Per my earlier post, low memory on a box running RHEL4 jumped > significantly when running the hugemem kernel. I wonder why this isn't > the case when using the RHEL5 PAE kernel? Unfortunately I don't have > any speare hardware to experiment with at the moment. > > > We already tried the parameters that Ray suggested and they didnt make > any > > difference. > > > > vm.lower_zone_protection is not available in the rhel5, so we are going > to > > try with less memory and see what it happens. > > > > Thanks all for the information/suggestions, this thread has been > excellent. > > You mentioned 64-bit wasn't an option at the moment...any chance it migh > be? When I installed 64-bit RHEL4, it also installed the 32-bit > versions of many packages and thus far I haven't had any issues. > > -Eric > > -- > Eric Sisler <esisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Library Network Specialist > Westminster Public Library > Westminster, CO USA > > Linux - Don't fear the Penguin. > Want to know what we use Linux for? > Visit http://wallace.westminster.lib.co.us/linux > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
