On Friday 10 February 2006 00:53, Mark Woodward wrote: > > Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes: > >> When people talk about disabling the OOM killer, it doesn't stop the > >> SIGKILL behaviour, > > > > Yes it does, because the situation will never arise. > > > >> it just causes the kernel to return -ENOMEM for > >> malloc() much much earlier... (ie when you still actually have memory > >> available). > > > > Given the current price of disk, there is no sane reason not to have > > enough swap space configured to make this not-a-problem. The OOM kill > > mechanism was a reasonable solution for running systems that were not > > expected to be too reliable anyway on small hardware, but if you're > > trying to run a 24/7 server you're simply incompetent if you don't > > disable it. > > And people say I have STRONG opinions. Don't hold back Tom, let us know > what you really think.
Read http://linux-mm.org/OverCommitAccounting or file://usr/src/linux/Documentation/vm/overcommit-accounting It is a good idea to have enough swap space. If not, set vm.overcommit_memory=2 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
