Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9
От | Pavel Suderevsky |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEBTBzt7u-+U_aOXiWSiKzWntGN2iaJg=rwztbEqS66gB=hNAg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
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? > [dbtest3] mars_gedik=# select > pg_size_pretty(pg_relation_size('node_statuses')); > pg_size_pretty > ---------------- > 11 MB > (1 row) > [dbtest3] mars_gedik=# select > pg_size_pretty(pg_relation_size('node_status_values')); > pg_size_pretty > ---------------- > 11 MB > (1 row) 2016-04-06 17:46 GMT+03:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Pavel Suderevsky <psuderevsky@gmail.com> writes: > > I've faced similar behaviour in much more simple situation. It crashed on > > simple nested loop. And all other child postmaster processes were > > terminated likewise. > > >> 2016-04-05 18:37:31 MSK LOG: server process (PID 2848) was terminated > by > >> signal 9: Killed > > Well, signal 9 is not an internal-to-Postgres error; that's something > outside the database killing the process. If you're on a Linux machine > it's most likely the dreaded OOM killer doing it. The usual > recommendation is to configure your system to reduce or eliminate > memory overcommit: > > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/kernel-resources.html#LINUX-MEMORY-OVERCOMMIT > > The OP's log did not indicate a signal 9, though --- that was SIGSEGV > (sig 11, typically). > > regards, tom lane >
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: