From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264356AbUASExh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2004 23:53:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264358AbUASExg (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2004 23:53:36 -0500 Received: from host-64-65-253-246.alb.choiceone.net ([64.65.253.246]:43686 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264356AbUASExf (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2004 23:53:35 -0500 Message-ID: <400B621D.7050307@tmr.com> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 23:50:37 -0500 From: Bill Davidsen Organization: TMR Associates Inc, Schenectady NY User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031208 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Pavel Machek , kernel list Subject: Re: sched-idle and disk-priorities for 2.6.X References: Your message of "Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:10:47 +0100." <20040116181047.GA1896@elf.ucw.cz> <200401161937.i0GJbJmv003365@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <400953B9.3090900@tmr.com> <400954E1.2050807@cyberone.com.au> In-Reply-To: <400954E1.2050807@cyberone.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979