On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> This patch gives the user a control to let the backend's likelyhood of >> being killed be different/higher than that of the postmaster. > > If you think your users might want to give the postmaster OOM-exemption, > why don't you just activate the existing code when you build? Resetting > the OOM setting to zero is safe whether or not the startup script did > anything to the postmaster's setting.
The whole scenario here is that the user *doesn't want to recompile*. You seem to be trying to relitigate an argument that Gurjeet already discussed in his original post and I already refuted once after that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
