* Thomas Ribbrock Design/DEG" ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 09:24:02PM -0800, Mark Ivey wrote:
>
> [out of memory -> crash]
>
> I might be completely off target, but I seem to remember that Linux
> actually starts killing off random processes once it runs out of space,
> which would explain the behaviour you described. I think it came up in a
> Linux vs. *BSD vs NT dicussion ages ago, so even if I do remember it
> correctly it might have changed in the meantime.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Thomas
Yeah, I seem to recall that linux will kill a process at random,
whereas *BSD will try to kill the process which is hogging the
resources. Something like that.
As to the lockup, either a) an important process was killed, one which
the system rather depended on, and it therefore went down, or b) the
program the guy was writing was so evil it didn't check the return
code from malloc and kept trying to allocate resources even when all
the memory had been used up. In that case, there is not much Linux can
do, it just kills off processes if it can, but if you keep allocating
memory at the same speed it does this, its never going to cope...
Tom.
--
.-------------------------------------------------------.
.^. | Tom Gilbert, England | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
/V\ |----------------------| www.tomgilbert.freeserve.co.uk |
// \\ | Sites I recommend: `--------------------------------|
/( )\ | www.freshmeat.net www.enlightenment.org slashdot.org |
^^-^^ `-------------------------------------------------------'
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
