4 ms·
I guess this works if you run few well known apps which manages memory well (yeh right). Maybe recycle/restart in regular intervals. Some programs have 4-8GB li
by z3t4 7y ago
I guess this works if you run few well known apps which manages memory well (yeh right). Maybe recycle/restart in regular intervals. Some programs have 4-8GB limits and will crash by themselves. Or you have a watcher service and recycle/restart after some threshold. And probably your distributed system can handle a few nodes going down. But without memory they will start to act weird. With swap they will usually work, but slower, and might eventually grind to an halt anyway, but it will make it easier to make a graceful shutdown/restart.
- VectorLock 7y agoIf your application starts running slower it should be killed. Redundancy means not having to worry about graceful anything.
- jmiserez 7y agoYou've stated this multiple times in this thread now. Maybe consider that not everyone has the same use case as you: some people are running larger chunks of computation per node or even stateful applications. Even when they could be killed and are redundant, running a bit slower for a moment until they recover may be preferable to restarting the node (which also takes time).
- VectorLock 7y agoThere are lots of different application models the issue here is ton of rule-of-thumb regression from "redundancy is important" to "swap is okay after-all I guess."