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

Re: Linux2.6 overcommit behaviour

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Linux2.6 overcommit behaviour
Date: 2003-09-01 02:37:58
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>I believe that the swap slot can be subsequently freed, though. In 
>>theory your available virtual memory should be (almost) RAM+swap. In 
>>practice, Linux can run too close to that limit, (or way over it if you 
>>turn the checks off). But restricting the maximum possible pages to 
>>RAM/2 + swap should normally be fine. IANAKH, though.
>>Also note that the truly bad thing about the OOM killer is that it can 
>>affect a process that is not making any new memory demands at all.
>How does the OOM killer kill processes, kill -9 or kill -1 and wait?

It sends a SIGKILL (9) unless the process is doing raw io, in which case 
it sends SIGTERM (15). It can't really wait - at this stage the kernel 
is in trouble - it can either kill processes or panic. The whole idea of 
strict accounting is not to let it get to this stage in the first place.

see mm/oom_kill.c



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-09-01 02:39:22
Subject: Re: Preliminary notes about hash index concurrency (long)
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-09-01 01:51:02
Subject: Re: pg_dump bug?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group