Re: PostgreSQL 8.0.6 crash
От | Stephen Frost |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL 8.0.6 crash |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20060209195344.GE4474@ns.snowman.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL 8.0.6 crash (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL 8.0.6 crash
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes: > > It doesn't seem like a bad idea to have a max_memory parameter that if a > > backend ever exceeded it would immediately abort the current > > transaction. > > See ulimit (or local equivalent). As much as setting ulimit in shell scripts is fun, I have to admit that I really don't see it happening very much. Having Postgres set a ulimit for itself may not be a bad idea and would perhaps provide a "least suprise" for new users. Perhaps shared_buffers + 10*work_mem + maintenance_work_mem + max_stack_depth? Then errors from running out of memory could provide a 'HINT: Memory consumption went well over allowed work_mem, perhaps you need to run ANALYZE or raise work_mem?'. Just some thoughts, Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: