[magicalhippo]

Well, in that case it's a good thing I guess. Windows is orders of magnitude better when it comes to memory management on the desktop compared to Linux. Like why would I even want a single process killed by OOM killer? On Windows things just work, or get slow. On Linux it works and then mayhem ensues.

Last year I was writing a reply on a forum in Firefox on Linux when the OOM killer decided to nuke Firefox. Poof gone, mid keystroke. How does anyone think that's acceptable?

This was on a stock Linux distro, nothing special.

[ChocolateGod]

> Windows is orders of magnitude better when it comes to memory management on the desktop compared to Linux.

The bar is pretty low, but the windows scheduler is aware what the currently focussed app is so it can prioritise not killing it.

On Linux? Not so much.

[zinekeller]

Actually, it depends on the Windows scheduler settings. On Windows Server, the default is to kill the foreground process (on the assumption that it is just a management app rather than a critical server component).

[magicalhippo]

In either case, Windows tries a lot of things to avoid killing processes. Which at least in a desktop setting is an infinitely better approach than random beheadings without warning.

[adgjlsfhk1]

yeah. a lot of the issue with Linux's approach is that until recently, the kernel was the one making the choice, and it doesn't know which processes matter. The part Linus does a lot better if not getting to oom in the first place (and with the newish compressed ram stuff is getting even better)