Re: configurability of OOM killer

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Markus Bertheau <mbertheau(dot)pg(at)googlemail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: configurability of OOM killer
Date: 2008-02-08 19:59:05
Message-ID: 20080208195905.GI31022@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs escribió:
> On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 08:45 +0600, Markus Bertheau wrote:
>
> > What about allowing shared_buffers to be only greater than it was at
> > server start and allocating the extra shared_buffers in one or more
> > additional shm segments?
>
> Sounds possible.

Hmm, but then you have to create new locks too. Seems really messy.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-02-08 20:01:43 Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
Previous Message Hiroshi Saito 2008-02-08 19:52:06 Re: "AS" by the syntax of table reference.(8.4 proposal)