| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: configurability of OOM killer |
| Date: | 2008-02-04 21:48:19 |
| Message-ID: | 8985.1202161699@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> writes:
> That shared memory of the children should not be added to the size
> of the parent process multiple times regardless of if something's
> an essential process or not. Since those bytes are shared, it
> seems such bytes should only be added to the badness once, no?
Certainly that would help, and it might be an easier sell to the kernel
hackers: instead of arguing "this policy is foolish", we only have to
say "your VM accounting is wildly inaccurate". We'd still end up with a
postmaster at more risk than we'd like, but at least not at dozens of
times more risk than any backend.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-02-04 21:52:50 | Re: configurability of OOM killer |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-02-04 21:40:49 | Re: configurability of OOM killer |