If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
systemd-oomd Looks Like It Will Come Together For systemd 247
One word: ignorance.
Again, people that don't know what they're talking about and haven't got the first clue about how Linux handles OOM situations ideologically condemn it because it has "systemd" in its name.
Those are the *nix admin fanboys for you. They have no clue about how the kernel works, they think they know it all because they read Bach's "The Design of the UNIX Operating System" back in 1986, they never developed any software other than a Perl script, they will fight tooth and nail for the idea that vi is the latest and greatest in UI design, but they believe that they are some sort of elite and that the world should reverently listen to them.
Like not swap executable code when the system is near-OOM?
Political problemsrequire political solutions. Touching kernel code is a pain in the ass and you also need to convince people that it is a problem at all (afaik they are not convinced in the lkml). It's much easier to just move that to a userspace application.
systemd deciding which of my apps to kill and when to kill them sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.
If you think systemd killing process is a disaster waiting to happen, you won't believe what disasters the kernel OOM actually does reliably. Like soft-locking the system in an unresponsive mode if there is swap at all.
I can monitor my own system memory just fine, thank you very much. There's conky and applets and htop and glances and system monitors and notifiers all over the place I can use.
Not everyone enjoys babysitting a machine that can and should deal with it on its own
Comment