Re: configurability of OOM killer

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ron Mayer
Тема Re: configurability of OOM killer
Дата
Msg-id 47A78449.4000104@cheapcomplexdevices.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: configurability of OOM killer  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Ответы Re: configurability of OOM killer  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: configurability of OOM killer  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Yeah, the only way to improve the OOM problem would be to harass the
> Linux developers to tweak badness() so that it considers the postmaster
> to be an essential process rather than the one to preferentially kill.

Wouldn't the more general rule that Jeff Davis pointed out upstream
make more sense?

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?


(assuming I understood Jeff correctly)



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: 0123 zyxw
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: FW: bitemporal functionality for PostgreSQL
Следующее
От: Jeff Davis
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: configurability of OOM killer