| 1 |
On 07/22/2011 11:13 AM, Grant wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Wouldn't a sufficiently large swap (100GB for example) completely |
| 4 |
> prevent out of memory conditions and the oom-killer? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
There's always someone who can pull a corner case out of his hat :) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I can't remember the details now, but there was a piece of code in |
| 9 |
the virtualbox svn repository that triggered a bug in gcc. The code |
| 10 |
in question caused gcc to loop forever while parsing, using more RAM |
| 11 |
with every iteration. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I watched my 4 gigs of RAM slowly fill up, and then watched nervously |
| 14 |
as my 4 gigs of swap began to fill up as well. After the swapping |
| 15 |
started, the machine was almost unusably slow. I typed Ctrl-Z and |
| 16 |
waited about five minutes until the gcc process finally suspended so |
| 17 |
I could kill the compile. |
Archives