Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Correct PID but incorrect victim name #194

Closed
PLPeeters opened this issue Apr 30, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

Correct PID but incorrect victim name #194

PLPeeters opened this issue Apr 30, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@PLPeeters
Copy link

We're using EarlyOOM on a JupyterLab (1.X) instance. I created a notebook where I just created some huge strings to eat some memory and when it got killed, the correct PID was logged, but the process name was wrong.

Before creating the last string that generates the OOM, I checked htop:

Screenshot 2020-04-30 at 13 45 59

EarlyOOM logged this:

Apr 30 11:46:14 <hostname_removed> earlyoom[1000]: Out of memory! avail: 82 MiB < min: 230 MiB
Apr 30 11:46:14 <hostname_removed> earlyoom[1000]: Killing process 7981 htop

So the PID is correct, but the name isn't (also, htop was still running after that, so it clearly killed the right PID).

I then generated OOMs in a JupyterLab Terminal with tail /dev/zero and in a Python shell in said terminal to see if the JupyterHub environment could be the issue in itself, and there the logs are fine (as expected after reading through #65).

@PLPeeters PLPeeters changed the title Correct PID name but incorrect victim name Correct PID but incorrect victim name Apr 30, 2020
@hakavlad
Copy link
Contributor

What version do you use?

@PLPeeters
Copy link
Author

Interesting, I was assuming it was the last one but apparently it's version 1.0, despite being freshly installed via apt on Ubuntu 18.04... Is that expected behaviour?

@hakavlad
Copy link
Contributor

Ubuntu offers an outdated version.

@PLPeeters
Copy link
Author

Found a PPA with a backport of 1.3, which fixed my issue! Perhaps it might make sense to add a warning to the README for this?

@rfjakob rfjakob closed this as completed in dfec89f May 2, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants