Re: PostgreSQL oom_adj postmaster process to -17

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Radovan Jablonovsky <radovan(dot)jablonovsky(at)replicon(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL oom_adj postmaster process to -17
Date: 2012-08-03 20:05:25
Message-ID: CAOR=d=0g78DvJUMPvEF5894x+gvR=VBnvLQ6t6fP2erW0QXK0A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Radovan Jablonovsky
<radovan(dot)jablonovsky(at)replicon(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks you for your response.
>
> Database config:
> shared_buffers = 8GB
> temp_buffers = 32MB
> work_mem = 64MB
> maintenance_work_mem = 512MB
> effective_cache_size = 16GB
>
> In usual load there are not much pressure on memory, but it is possible to
> have all clients start using heavy reports. They are valid requests and
> could consume all memory. In this border and not likely but possible
> scenario it could be useful to let OOM killer to kill client's
> processes/connections but leave PostgreSQL system processes (postmaster,
> writer, stat, log, streaming, ...) excluded from reach of OOM killer.

You're only realistic solution is to either limit the incoming
connections via a connection pooler like pgbouncer or to lower your
work_mem to something smaller. What's you're current max connections
setting?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bryan Hinton 2012-08-04 03:46:36
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-08-03 20:01:58 Re: pg_dump on Postgres 9.1