Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Setting oom_adj on linux?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Setting oom_adj on linux?
Date: 2010-01-08 03:26:14
Message-ID: 25346.1262921174@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> FWIW here is the patch I run.  Stupid as the patch may be, count it as
> a +1 for people in the field doing this.  Hence a reason to think
> about doing something in core.  maybe.

Thanks for the patch --- it's certainly a fine starting point.

We can either drop this in core (with a lot of #ifdef LINUX added)
or expect Linux packagers to carry it as a patch.  Given that the
packagers would also have to modify their init scripts to go with,
the patch route is not unreasonable.  Comments?

> This has some oddities like it does not reset oom to 0 for the (wal)
> writer process.

FWIW, I think that's probably a feature --- I'd vote for only resetting
in regular backends and possibly autovac workers.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-01-08 03:38:30
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-08 03:20:37
Subject: Re: damage control mode

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group