cross out option 2
This commit is contained in:
parent
41212d7f4c
commit
7948e33ae2
|
@ -214,15 +214,15 @@ Therefore, no memory pressure. This will occur as long as memory.total_inactive
|
|||
|
||||
### Proposed solutions:
|
||||
1. Set the cgroup event at `threshold*fraction`.
|
||||
For example, if `--eviction-hard=memory.available<200Mi`, set the cgroup event at `100Mi`.
|
||||
For example, if `--eviction-hard=memory.available<200Mi`, use `fraction=1/2` set the cgroup event at `100Mi`.
|
||||
This way, when the eviction manager is triggered, it will likely observe memory pressure.
|
||||
This is not guaranteed to always work, but should prevent OOMs in most cases.
|
||||
This is not guaranteed to always work, but should prevent OOMs in most cases, and is simple to implement.
|
||||
|
||||
2. Use Usage instead of Working Set to determine memory pressure
|
||||
~~2. Use Usage instead of Working Set to determine memory pressure
|
||||
This would mean that the eviction manager and cgroup notifications use the same metric,
|
||||
and thus the response is ideal: the eviction manager is triggered exactly when memory pressure occurs.
|
||||
However, the eviction manager may often evict unneccessarily if there are large quantities of memory
|
||||
the kernel has not yet reclaimed.
|
||||
the kernel has not yet reclaimed.~~
|
||||
|
||||
3. Increase the syncloop interval after the threshold is crossed
|
||||
For example, the eviction manager could start collecting observations every second instead of every
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue