Re: configurability of OOM killer - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Decibel!
Subject Re: configurability of OOM killer
Date
Msg-id 20080205213339.GI1212@decibel.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: configurability of OOM killer  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: configurability of OOM killer  (Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 08:46:26PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > I cannot see any way of restricting global memory
> > consumption that won't hurt performance and flexibility.
>
> We've discussed particular ways of doing this previously and not got
> very far, its true. I think we need to separate problem identification
> from problem resolution, so we can get past the first stage and look for
> solutions.
>
> This is my longest running outstanding problem with managing Postgres on
> operational systems.
>
> Sure, OOM killer sucks. So there's two problems, not one.

Yes, this problem goes way beyond OOM. Just try and configure
work_memory aggressively on a server that might see 50 database
connections, and do it in such a way that you won't swap. Good luck.

We really do need a way to limit how much memory we will use in total.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect  decibel@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ron Mayer
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature Freeze Date for Next Release
Next
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #3909: src\tools\msvc\clean.bat clears parse.h file