Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Developers Have An Idea For Handling The Over-Eager Systemd OOMD App Killing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by sinepgib View Post
    What happens if the user isn't the criminal? Is the user allowed to kill anyone's process?
    Why not, aren't we currently allowing a systemd/Canonical engineer to kill anyone's process? Might as well allow someone actually authorized to access the machine.

    Originally posted by sinepgib View Post
    No notification. Simply hope an admin will say "hey I'm bored let's check if we have OOM". And no, no way to notify either, until there's enough memory the system is pretty much halted.
    Aren't we currently simply hoping an admin will say "hey I'm bored let's check if any of my processes have been killed"?

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by sinepgib View Post

      Fair enough, I thought it was meant as a replacement for the eager reclaiming. What happens in the "let it sit" case, tho?
      What, specifically, are you referring to as the "let it sit" case?

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
        What ever Idea it is ....it will be implemented by using snap.
        And when it kills your favorite app...OH SNAP!!

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by sinepgib View Post
          For those screaming "just buy more RAM": ugh. It's tiresome to read the same dumb crap again and again.

          WRT the actual problem, it seems to me it's poorly configured...
          Yes, I agree. Newbie computer users should not run Linux.

          They should stick to MacOS...or better yet...Windozes

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by sarmad View Post
            Why not, aren't we currently allowing a systemd/Canonical engineer to kill anyone's process? Might as well allow someone actually authorized to access the machine.
            A privileged service, not just any user. It's, for a start, an actor you trust just as much as your kernel to do the task.

            Originally posted by sarmad View Post
            Aren't we currently simply hoping an admin will say "hey I'm bored let's check if any of my processes have been killed"?
            If you manage any server, and I do not want to know, I expect you have some kind of heartbeat running. And, further, I expect you configured vital services to restart on their own if they die.

            Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
            What, specifically, are you referring to as the "let it sit" case?
            It was suggested that if the user wasn't around or it was a server, the thing just waited and waited.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by NotMine999 View Post
              Yes, I agree. Newbie computer users should not run Linux.

              They should stick to MacOS...or better yet...Windozes
              Huh? I didn't expect that to be the reading of my post, but I guess it's a valid one. I'll clarify: Canonical, most likely, made a lousy default. Noobs should have a decent experience. But that means defaults need to be sane configurations. One that kills the users' browsers when there's no memory pressure is not it.

              Comment


              • #57
                1. Zram helps a lot.
                2. ‚Äč‚Äčnohang is an alternative, can kill single browser tabs rather than the whole browser.

                Comment

                Working...
                X