Patch to protect process from pageout killing

[Wes Peters]

On Saturday 29 March 2003 14:02, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <200303280910.32307.wes at softweyr.com>, Wes Peters writes:
> >I've reworked my patch to use the madvise(2) syscall, like the
> > original 4.x patch did.  I've even documented it, in a man page of
> > all places. Please see attached patch.  If nobody objects, I'll
> > commit sometime this weekend.
>
> I'm still not certain about the inheritance of this, do we want/is it
> inherited ?

In my case, I don't want the property to be inherited because I don't want 
all of the squid worker processes to be "immortal," just the parent.  I'm 
not sure about other facilities.  Children of inetd are a good gedanken 
but seem a mixed bag to me; you might not want to kill off a POP or IMAP 
server, but interactive logins probably are expendable.  That seems to 
call for non-inheritance.  This is easily tunable after the fact, if 
someone comes up with a compelling reason to have this flag be inherited.

> Also, thinking about it, on at least a handful of machines I would
> have more use for MADV_KILLMEFIRST having the exact opposite
> behaviour.

Hmm, that's an interesting viewpoint.  I'm approaching this very much from 
the embedded server appliance viewpoint, and given my past few years 
experience am not able to see much beyond that and a programmers 
workstation. ;^)

-- 

        Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?

Wes Peters                                               wes at softweyr.com