4 ms·
There's the rub. Different people in different situations will want different outcomes from a low-memory situation. One of those different outcomes has to be th
by jerkstate 7y ago
There's the rub. Different people in different situations will want different outcomes from a low-memory situation. One of those different outcomes has to be the default.
- jolmg 7y agoReally, I'd be fine with anything dying as long as it does not freeze. As it stands, when this happens, the only option left is to force a poweroff.
- Annatar 7y agoActually most Linux users are blissfully unaware that Linux overallocates memory and of those that know about it, very few understand the consequences to applications (such as data corruption or data loss). I doubt anyone who fully understood the consequences would want to run their infrastructure on something so unreliable and I doubt it because it's logical to me that they wouldn't.
- zzzcpan 7y agoYou got it backwards. Those of us who care about reliability would never rely on reliability of a single system to safely store data. And overallocating memory is not even remotely that important compared to everything else that can go wrong on a system.
- Annatar 7y agoOne cannot build a reliable system on unreliable software. If you believe you can, there is a lesson in store waiting for you.
- jolmg 7y agoIPv4 on its own is not reliable, but TCP adds reliability on top of it. Aren't distributed systems in general also designed to be reliable despite being composed of unreliable components?
- zzzcpan 7y agoYes, fault tolerance is the reason distributed systems field even exists. Literally to make something reliable out of unreliable.