Re: configurability of OOM killer

Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> writes:
> 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?

Certainly that would help, and it might be an easier sell to the kernel
hackers: instead of arguing "this policy is foolish", we only have to
say "your VM accounting is wildly inaccurate".  We'd still end up with a
postmaster at more risk than we'd like, but at least not at dozens of
times more risk than any backend.
        regards, tom lane