From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1O4zgu-0001yL-Nj for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:55:53 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 91071E091B; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.221.179]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71682E091B for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so11525656qyk.1 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:55:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=ntQRfARBIarl+01POAYf+5klWlnOHJvpOc/sdh2n7XY=; b=avtCbekMnhepUR7x+aYLKS5qFmL2F4sjdAaE05H2WorN97pE99suHOS9bfbvUHsvc5 alsTA+QGKObNogI0yB7XQ6xdY4fJbO1T36juhqtoF88l21sZ2UnzhzqSfJ13nzoJGgEJ eXf4bJhdHD/IOC1KftcKr4/LQ+HAR9PH1wAPo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=S6V713BYmbFBrM+PAzb44F1IUpU6SbCYU1mvIERjrhCeD2qVBoJYe/e+lkdVLO96gp 8Q3p98cxwGUM/CITtwuZpZ1BxxmoqKnxpo71K4MGbymx1WnzNtbvSIaZhuUxK+gtHYwu s1UUXOSYgUwSHq4xyHTHB3DIlbjP6SY3/ua24= Received: by 10.224.107.26 with SMTP id z26mr3356124qao.123.1271955323950; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:55:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet ([72.14.241.41]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 26sm619416qwa.12.2010.04.22.09.55.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:55:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-box stopping services Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 18:52:05 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.2 (Linux/2.6.33-zen1; KDE/4.4.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: "Stefan G. Weichinger" References: <4BCD97B0.3050305@xunil.at> <201004221750.50472.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <4BD07828.7080106@xunil.at> In-Reply-To: <4BD07828.7080106@xunil.at> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201004221852.05699.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 0d4546bb-6c12-45bf-aec3-6ea987f702cd X-Archives-Hash: 7c76f4971cef4cca77cd9b5ed3e665fa On Thursday 22 April 2010 18:24:08 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 22.04.2010 17:50, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > >> Shouldn't the kernel *swap* then ? > > > > No, the OOM killer kicks in when the kernel has no more virtual memory, > > including swap. Either way, more RAM is the answer. Or fidn the app with > > the memory leak if you are unlucky enough to have one of those running > > around. > > The added swapfile with one GB won't help here for a start? It will certainly help. If your core problem is simply not enough RAM, then 1G more might be all you need. You'd have to run checks and do some monitoring to see if performance is affected. I haven't followed the full thread so I don't know what you are running; and some daemons perform really badly if they have to touch swap. Apache for example, a busy MTA for another - disks are thousands of times slower than RAM, so if a webserver has to swap memory back in from disk, it almost instantly brings the server to a grinding halt. On my web and mail servers I have no swap at all, they do have lots and lots of RAM; my Sybase database servers have enormous amounts of swap. Each server has been profiled so it is set up to be as close to ideal as I can determine. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com