| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: configurability of OOM killer |
| Date: | 2008-02-04 20:46:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1202157986.4252.590.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I cannot see any way of restricting global memory
> consumption that won't hurt performance and flexibility.
We've discussed particular ways of doing this previously and not got
very far, its true. I think we need to separate problem identification
from problem resolution, so we can get past the first stage and look for
solutions.
This is my longest running outstanding problem with managing Postgres on
operational systems.
Sure, OOM killer sucks. So there's two problems, not one.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-02-04 20:50:30 | Re: FW: bitemporal functionality for PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-02-04 20:44:35 | Re: Page-at-a-time Locking Considerations |