Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition

From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
To: John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition
Date: 2005-10-25 03:20:39
Message-ID: 20051025032039.GB16642@wolff.to
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> Good people,
>
> Just had a thought!
>
> Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
> Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
> (Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)

Wouldn't it be better to use sysctl to tell the kernel not to over commit
memory in the first place?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Qingqing Zhou 2005-10-25 03:21:07 Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2005-10-25 03:09:51 Re: Replaying archived wal files after a dump restore?