[17478] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: Proposed platform assumption changes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Russ Allbery)
Sat Jan 28 18:45:21 2012
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
To: krbdev@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20120128231727.GY7323@mournblade.imrryr.org> (Roland
C. Dowdeswell's message of "Sat, 28 Jan 2012 23:17:27 +0000")
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:45:17 -0800
Message-ID: <87fwezo0he.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
"Roland C. Dowdeswell" <elric@imrryr.org> writes:
> Another example would be a process which has a data limit set via
> setrlimit(2). Again, in this case, the process would be limited to a
> reasonable amount of memory and the OS would not necessarily be placed
> into the position where more memory had been allocated than it had swap
> to back.
Yes, having a memory limit imposed with setrlimit is not unknown in web
hosting environments, for example. We do it in our sandbox CGI
environment.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
