Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition

From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
To: John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition
Date: 2005-10-03 13:17:21
Message-ID: 20051003131716.GB15212@svana.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:03:06PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
> Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
> Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
> (Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)

Has it actually happened to you? PostgreSQL is pretty good about its
memory usage. Besides, seems to me it should be an system admisitrator
descision.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-10-03 13:52:19 Re: [HACKERS] Updated documentation for new sequence binding
Previous Message John Hansen 2005-10-03 13:03:06 PG Killed by OOM Condition