[Gllug] ulimits

[Jon Masters]

On 02 Sep 2001 11:50:35 +0100, Alex Hudson wrote:

jcm>> Yup indeed, especially when a user consumes 100% CPU for 500 squillion
jcm>> hours because they forgot to account for condition X occuring.
> 
> And this is a problem how? I presume you know how nice works.

I suppose it must be ``beyond my abilities'' to understand that too huh?
:)

> If users are run low priority, then the machine is still able to do its work.

Now you're heading away from the original point - of course it can
``still do its work'' however setting priority limits alone do not a
good system make IMO.

> The real problem is people running rampant in swap

Yes however because (strangely enough) I am not a clueless moron, per
user limits already account for that obvious issue.

> Linux is not a research OS.

Microsoft Windows is not fit for many of the purposes it is used for IMO
- people still use it. Why is it that everyone is not using the HURD
then?

The real answer is that people will use whatever they want to, not what
is dictated as being the superior. Perhaps I have good reason to stick
with the Linux kernel (which since you wish to be a pedant I would do
the standard thing of pointing out is *not* an "Operating System" in the
first place).

> Find me a paper researching OS principles on Linux

> and I'll show you twenty on Mach.

Fine, go use it then if you want to. I have not imposed any restrictions
on your choice however you seem to wish to convince me that mine are all
wrong.

I shall continue this discussion off list.

--jcm



-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug