From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:03:13 -0800 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <28232d96bbd525fc552e6de76012b300@brasstown.quanstro.net> In-Reply-To: <1e3ff82b552e438333aa8a996af01cd7@felloff.net> References: <1e3ff82b552e438333aa8a996af01cd7@felloff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] protection against resource exhaustion Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3cf32f3c-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > > in case that a process failed in getting resource such as memory or process, > > what it should do is very limited: puts out some message and exits. > > this is right behavior. > > practically, for most simple programs fork error is handled by sysfatal(). > but things get more tricky for libthread programs like rio. i'd forgotten the added difficulty with the 32-bit kernels that plan 9 overcommits memory. so in a low-memory situation, a process can be killed by using more stack! - erik