| 1 |
On Friday 22 July 2011 19:13:35 Grant wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Wouldn't a sufficiently large swap (100GB for example) completely prevent |
| 4 |
> out of memory conditions and the oom-killer? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Of course, on any system with more than a few dozen MB of RAM, but I can't |
| 7 |
imagine any combination of running programs whose size could add up to even |
| 8 |
a tenth of that, with or without library sharing (somebody will be along |
| 9 |
with an example in a moment). For instance I'm running four instances of |
| 10 |
BOINC projects here, one on each core, with oodles of space to spare and no |
| 11 |
swapping. Mind you, I do have 16GB RAM :-) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Having said that I ought to go and shrink my swap partitions, but my disks |
| 14 |
are only half-allocated already, so I don't see the point. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Rgds |
| 18 |
Peter Linux Counter number 5290 |
Archives