Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Pavel Suderevsky <psuderevsky(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Aleksey Romanov <drednout(dot)by(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9
Date: 2016-04-06 15:00:16
Message-ID: 32700.1459954816@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Pavel Suderevsky <psuderevsky(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Yes, OOM killer did the job, but is it normal that so lightweight query is
> consuming so much memory that OOM-killer to be invoked?

[ shrug... ] The OOM killer is widely considered broken. Its heuristics
don't interact terribly well with processes using large amounts of shared
memory.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Suderevsky 2016-04-06 18:22:23 Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9
Previous Message Pavel Suderevsky 2016-04-06 14:53:25 Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9