In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.email@example.com>,
James Sutherland <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> Erhmm, sorry that I have to say this Paul, but this
>> sounds like non-overcommit is about shifting the blame
>> and not about fixing the problem...
>In fact, it makes the problem worse.
If the problem is an intruder on your system who is attempting a
deliberate denial of service attack, maybe. If the problem is a
program allocating more memory than there is in the system and
making a different program die because of the overcommit,
non-overcommit is the best solution to this feature.
david parsons \bi/ though the rationales for overcommit are interesting.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:29 EST