Re: configurability of OOM killer
| От | Ron Mayer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: configurability of OOM killer |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 47A71A61.4030608@cheapcomplexdevices.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: configurability of OOM killer (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > >> ... OOM_Killer >> > > Egad. Whoever thought *this* was a good idea should be taken out > and shot: > If I read this right, http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/9/275 even the shared memory is counted many times (once per child) for the parent process - even though it's (obviously) not copy-on-write so the shared memory's unlikely to contribute to problems. I wonder if postgres startup should write something (warning? at least log?) in the log file if the OOM killer is enabled. I assume most people who care deeply about their database dying would notice a warning in log files; while most people who don't mind the OOM killer also wouldn't be too bothered by extra noise in the file.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: