LINUX.ORG.RU

История изменений

Исправление hakavlad, (текущая версия) :

Неужели теперь Linux при нехватке ресурсов будет реагировать нормально, как то же ядро NT

Если говорить о ядре, то нет: мейнлайовые mm-мейнтейнеры признают проблему, но не готовы что-либо делать для ее решения.

Ну и ответа Михала Хоко - это вообще пушка:

Really, you should realize that such a knob would become carved
into stone as soon as wee merge this and we will need to support it
for ever! It is really painful (if possible at all) to deprecate any
tunable knobs that cannot be supported anymore because the underlying
implementation doesn't allow for that.  So we would absolutely need to
be sure this is the right approach to the problem.  I am not convinced
about that though.

How does the admin know the limit should be set to a certain
workload? What if the workload characteristics change and the existing
setting is just to restrictive? What if the workload istrashing over
something different than anon/file memory (e.g. any other cache that we
have or might have in the future)?

As you have pointed out there were general recommendations to use user
space based oom killer solutions which can be tuned for the specific
workload or used in an environment where the disruptive OOM killer
action is less of a problem because workload can be restarted easily
without too much harm caused by the oom killer.
Please keep in mind that there are many more different workloads that
have different requirements and an oom killer invocation can be really
much worse than a slow progress due to ephemeral, peak or even longer
term trashing or heavy refaults.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YbcNUEZ08lmbv0RM@dhcp22.suse.cz/

Буквально:

  • админы не смогут подобрать оптимальное значение для новой ручки, поэтому лучше ее не добавлять вообще;
  • а вдруг мы когда-нибудь найдем лучшее решение проблемы, и ручка окажется не нужна?
  • используйте earlyoom/oomd, мы не хотим брать на себя ответственность за решение проблемы на уровне ядра!

Признают проблему на словах, но менять ничего не собираются.

Исходная версия hakavlad, :

Неужели теперь Linux при нехватке ресурсов будет реагировать нормально, как то же ядро NT

Если говорить о ядре, то нет: мейнлайовые mm-мейнтейнеры признают, проблему, но не готовы что-либо делать для ее решения.

Ну и ответа Михала Хоко - это вообще пушка:

Really, you should realize that such a knob would become carved
into stone as soon as wee merge this and we will need to support it
for ever! It is really painful (if possible at all) to deprecate any
tunable knobs that cannot be supported anymore because the underlying
implementation doesn't allow for that.  So we would absolutely need to
be sure this is the right approach to the problem.  I am not convinced
about that though.

How does the admin know the limit should be set to a certain
workload? What if the workload characteristics change and the existing
setting is just to restrictive? What if the workload istrashing over
something different than anon/file memory (e.g. any other cache that we
have or might have in the future)?

As you have pointed out there were general recommendations to use user
space based oom killer solutions which can be tuned for the specific
workload or used in an environment where the disruptive OOM killer
action is less of a problem because workload can be restarted easily
without too much harm caused by the oom killer.
Please keep in mind that there are many more different workloads that
have different requirements and an oom killer invocation can be really
much worse than a slow progress due to ephemeral, peak or even longer
term trashing or heavy refaults.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YbcNUEZ08lmbv0RM@dhcp22.suse.cz/

Буквально:

  • админы не смогут подобрать оптимальное значение для новой ручки, поэтому лучше ее не добавлять вообще;
  • а вдруг мы когда-нибудь найдем лучшее решение проблемы, и ручка окажется не нужна?
  • используйте earlyoom/oomd, мы не хотим брать на себя ответственность за решение проблемы на уровне ядра!

Признают проблему на словах, но менять ничего не собираются.