Hacker News Reader

What if the thing you kill is in the critical stack to saving your work? If it isn't I don't really understand why you would be swapping it in a lot

I would view the OOm solution as a compute as cattle thinb, but here we are talking about a user desktop where the user can take the best action for themselves once they realize there's a problem.

View on HN

> If it isn't I don't really understand why you would be swapping it in a lot.

The user doesn't decide which processes are swapped in. If the process gets CPU time and tries to access its data, that data will get swapped in.

> We are talking about a user desktop where the user can take the best action for themselves once they realize there's a problem.

You can't do that with swap, because once you realize there's a problem, you cannot even move your cursor or run commands to take any actions.

This sounds nothing like the gradual leak problem described.. An OOM killer is great once you actually run out of resources, removing virtual resources to always run out and play roulette is using it as a fad hammer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com