On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
>Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> said:
>
>[...]
>
>> THAT DEPENDS ON POLICY - as defined by management. That "very big and newly
>> started" may NOT be the most suitable. If resource quotas are in place, then
>> the process would not have been started at all. If quotas are adjusted
>> to make resources available then again there is no need to abort any
>> process.
>
>Except those of users that just so happen are going over their allocated
>quota. Which go to management complaining that not even at night, when the
>system is otherwise idle, they can run their large jobs.
Only if management has said they won't run their jobs. I work in an environment
that schedules large job runs. Sorry in this you miss the boat.
>
>[...]
>
>> I'm already working in one area where OOM is considered catastrophic -
>> High security and high availablity systems must NOT have the system go
>> OOM. That is what per user resource quotas help to prevent.
>
>That is a very narrow, specialized application area. I'd assume you have
>the resources then to hire somebody to "fix" the kernel for you, and then
>publisghing the resulting patches for all to consider/include/use.
I said one area - that area covers:
1. E-commerce servers
2. banking and accounting
3. medical data bases
4. Stock market servers
5. large scientific/enginerring simulation
6. corporate disk servers
This actually covers the majority of the use of computers. I don't care
if they are also served by failure prone systems now. I don't want them
to fail.
THEY SHOULD NOT FAIL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse I Pollard, II
Email: pollard@cats-chateau.net
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:31 EST