Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Now the problem is that we have defined the LINUX_OOM_ADJ symbol as
> meaning the value we're going to write. Maybe this wasn't the best
> choice. I mean, it's very flexible, but it doesn't seem to offer any
> benefit over a plain boolean choice.
> Is your proposal to create a new LINUX_OOM_SCORE_ADJ cpp symbol with the
> same semantics?
Yes, that's what I was thinking. We could avoid that if we were going
to hard-wire a decision that zero is the thing to write, but I see no
reason to place such a restriction on users. Who's to say they might
not want backends to adopt some other value?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
