Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition

From: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
To: Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>
Cc: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition
Date: 2005-10-04 08:59:05
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0510041048260.28238-100000@zigo.dhs.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Jeff Davis wrote:

> involved, but I could be wrong. Is it possible to be hit by the OOM
> killer if no applications use fork()?

Sure, whenever the system is out of mem and the os can't find a free page
then it kills a process. If you check the kernel log you can see if the
oom killer have been doing some work.

--
/Dennis Björklund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2005-10-04 09:16:40 Re: Tuning current tuplesort external sort code for 8.2
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2005-10-04 06:47:57 Re: PG Killed by OOM Condition