Re: Pre-allocation of shared memory ...

Tom Lane wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
> > I have two explanations for the following behaviour:
> > a. a bug
> > b. not enough shared memory
>
> > WARNING: Message from PostgreSQL backend:
> > The Postmaster has informed me that some other backend
> > died abnormally and possibly corrupted shared memory.
>
> Is this a Linux machine? If so, the true explanation is probably (c):
> the kernel is kill 9'ing randomly-chosen database processes whenever
> it starts to feel low on memory. I would suggest checking the
> postmaster log to determine the signal number the failed backends are
> dying with. The client-side message does not give nearly enough info
> to debug such problems.
>
> There is also possibility (d): you have some bad RAM that is located in
> an address range that doesn't get used until the machine is under full
> load. But if the backends are dying with signal 9 then I'll take the
> kernel-kill theory.
>
> AFAIK the only good way around this problem is to use another OS with a
> more rational design for handling low-memory situations. No other Unix
> does anything remotely as brain-dead as what Linux does. Or bug your
> favorite Linux kernel hacker to fix the kernel.

Is there no sysctl way to disable such kills?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073