On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> said:
>
> [...]
>
> > Without overcommit:
> > You can support 100 simultaneous connections, with full saturation of
> > each server, with no failures.
> >
> > Result: happy customers, happy management, maybe even a raise.
>
> Management nagging about supporting more pages, worried by waste of several
> Gb of disk that has never, ever been touched. System is sluggish, needs
> constant tweaking of "resource allocation quotas" as applications crash,
> even there are resources available. Seriously consider firing inept
> sysadmin.
Then, the new sysadm turns overcommiting on, and suddenly you realize
that you can support 300 simultaneous connections, with REAL full saturation
of each server, with no failure. 100% agreed.
Either the system is under control, or it's not. A perfectly tuned system
never goes OOM or OOS. A badly configured system misperforms no matter of
overcommitting being on or off.
.TM.
--
____/ ____/ /
/ / / Marco Colombo
___/ ___ / / Technical Manager
/ / / ESI s.r.l.
_____/ _____/ _/ Colombo@ESI.it
-
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 - 21:00:32 EST