Operating Systems - Thrashing - Working Set Model & Prevention
In a system where processes have highly variable and bursty working set sizes, which approach better prevents thrashing and why?
In a system where processes have highly variable and bursty working set sizes, which approach better prevents thrashing and why?
hard🚀 Application Q8 of Q15
Step-by-Step Solution
Solution:
Step 1: Understand bursty working set challenges
Variable working sets can cause sudden memory pressure and thrashing.Step 2: Evaluate approaches
A: Allocating max working set wastes memory during low usage.
B: Swapping entire processes is costly and reactive, not preventive.
C: Global replacement ignores locality, increasing thrashing risk.
D: Adaptive load control limits active processes to fit memory, preventing thrashing.Final Answer:
Option D -> Option DQuick Check:
Adaptive load control balances memory and process count [OK]
Quick Trick: Limit active processes adaptively to prevent thrashing [OK]
Common Mistakes:
MISTAKES- Over-allocating frames wastes memory
- Ignoring per-process locality in global replacement
- Assuming swapping entire processes is efficient
Trap Explanation:
PITFALL- Candidates often prefer static allocation or global policies, missing adaptive load control benefits.
Interviewer Note:
CONTEXT- Assesses ability to apply working set concepts to dynamic, real-world workloads.
Master "Thrashing - Working Set Model & Prevention" in Operating Systems
Want More Practice?
15+ quiz questions · All difficulty levels · Free
Free Signup - Practice All QuestionsMore Operating Systems Quizzes