On Thu 22 Aug 2024 at 20:31:24 (-0700), Mike Castle wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 4:31 PM David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
↑↑↑↑↑↑↑ odd time to pick
> > Irrespective of the time taken, that could trigger the OOM killer,
> > couldn't it. Very risky, unless you're using two swaps as mentioned.
>
> I was actually surprised to see this happen in a test right now. I
> *thought* that swapoff() would fail if reduce the available memory to
> below current usage.
>
> But indeed, the OOM Killer not only killed my test program, it took
> out the swapoff command for good measure!
So in the case of the OP, it might well kill off the entire
swapoff/swapon script, leaving the system with no swap at all.
But as I said, I don't think a shortage of memory is the reason
for the OP having swap space here at all.
Cheers,
David.
