Re: sched-idle and disk-priorities for 2.6.X

[Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>]

Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
> 
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
> 
>> Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>>
>>> A better bet would be a patch that allowed you to set the maximum RSS 
>>> size for
>>> the process so it can basically thrash itself while leaving enough 
>>> memory for
>>> everybody else (and yes, I *know* how this can be self-defeating if the
>>> thrashing app then increases the total I/O consumed to be higher than 
>>> the I/O
>>> bandwidth available - the point is that it's probably the high RSS 
>>> value for
>>> his application causing OTHER things to thrash that's the root cause 
>>> of his
>>> performance problem).
>>
>>
>>
>> Or you could use "ulimit -m" to set the RSS, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think that would do anything with 2.6 :P

Does that imply that the feature doesn't function as documented in 2.6? 
Or is that a SysV-ism not in SuS and documented but not implemented, or 
what other reason would there be for it to not work?


-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
   CTO TMR Associates, Inc
   Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979