Re: Pre-allocation of shared memory ...

The trouble with this advice is that if I am an SA wanting to run a DBMS
server, I will want to run a kernel supplied by a vendor, not an arbitrary
kernel released by a developer, even one as respected as Alan Cox.

andrew

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lamar Owen" <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
To: "Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>; <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Pre-allocation of shared memory ...

> On Friday 13 June 2003 15:29, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > It is or was a Linux kernel problem. The 2.2 kernel required double
swap
> > space, even though it wasn't well documented. Early 2.4 kernels also
> > required double swap space, and it was better documented. Current Red
Hat
> > 2.4 kernels, I'm not sure which VM system is in use. The old VM
certainly
> > DID require double physical memory swap space.
>
> After consulting with some kernel gurus, you can upgrade to a straight
Alan
> Cox (-ac) kernel and turn off overcommits to cause it to fail the
allocation
> instead of blowing processes out at random when the overcommit bites.