daveg wrote:
When this happens the machine runs out of memory and swap. Without the oom
killer it simply hangs the machine which is inconvenient as it is at a remote
location. The oom killer usually lets the machine recover and postgres restart
without a hard reboot.
If vm.overcommit is set
daveg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I work with a client that runs 16Gb memory with 16Gb of swap on dual opterons
dedicated to postgres. They have large tables and like hash joins as they are
often the fastest way to a result, so work_mem is set fairly large. Sometimes
postgres is very inaccurate
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good people,
Just had a thought!
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)
Wouldn't it be better
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:20:39PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good people,
Just had a thought!
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 23:55:07 -0400,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:20:39PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good people,
Just had a thought!
Might it be worth while protecting the
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 11:26:52PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 23:55:07 -0400,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:20:39PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good
It's not an easy decision. Linux isn't wrong. Solaris isn't wrong.
Most people never hit these problems, and the people that do, are
just as likely to hit one problem, or the other. The grass is always
greener on the side of the fence that isn't hurting me right now,
and all that.
Cheers,
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Jeff Davis wrote:
involved, but I could be wrong. Is it possible to be hit by the OOM
killer if no applications use fork()?
Sure, whenever the system is out of mem and the os can't find a free page
then it kills a process. If you check the kernel log you can see if the
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:47:57PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
I think that I've run into the OOM killer without a fork() being
involved, but I could be wrong. Is it possible to be hit by the OOM
killer if no applications use fork()?
fork() is the obvious overcomitter. If Netscape wants to spawn
Good people,
Just had a thought!
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)
Kind Regards,
John Hansen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:03:06PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)
Has it actually happened to you? PostgreSQL is pretty good about its
memory
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)
(a) wouldn't that require root privilege? (b) how would we determine
whether we are on a system to
Martijn van Oosterhout Wrote:
Has it actually happened to you? PostgreSQL is pretty good
about its memory usage. Besides, seems to me it should be an
system admisitrator descision.
No, Just came across this by chance, and thought it might be a good
idea.
Perhaps as a postgresql.conf
Tom Lane Wrote:
(a) wouldn't that require root privilege? (b) how would we
determine whether we are on a system to which this applies?
(c) is it actually documented in a way that makes you think
it'll be a permanently supported feature (ie, somewhere
outside the source code)?
(a) No,
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:03:06PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)
Has it actually happened to you? PostgreSQL is
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 01:25:00PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:03:06PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 01:25:00PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
It's happened to me...
Usually it's when there's some other runaway process, and the kernel
decides to kill PostgreSQL because it can't tell the difference.
I really don't like that feature in linux. Nobody has been able to
explain
17 matches
Mail list logo
