| From: | "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 8.0.6 crash |
| Date: | 2006-02-09 23:53:18 |
| Message-ID: | 18517.24.91.171.78.1139529198.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>> When people talk about disabling the OOM killer, it doesn't stop the
>> SIGKILL behaviour,
>
> Yes it does, because the situation will never arise.
>
>> it just causes the kernel to return -ENOMEM for
>> malloc() much much earlier... (ie when you still actually have memory
>> available).
>
> Given the current price of disk, there is no sane reason not to have
> enough swap space configured to make this not-a-problem. The OOM kill
> mechanism was a reasonable solution for running systems that were not
> expected to be too reliable anyway on small hardware, but if you're
> trying to run a 24/7 server you're simply incompetent if you don't
> disable it.
And people say I have STRONG opinions. Don't hold back Tom, let us know
what you really think.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ernst Herzberg | 2006-02-10 00:23:00 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.0.6 crash |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-09 22:32:04 | Re: Server Programming in C: palloc() and pfree() |