Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9 - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9
Date
Msg-id 32700.1459954816@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9
List pgsql-bugs
Pavel Suderevsky <psuderevsky@gmail.com> writes:
> Yes, OOM killer did the job, but is it normal that so lightweight query is
> consuming so much memory that OOM-killer to be invoked?

[ shrug... ]  The OOM killer is widely considered broken.  Its heuristics
don't interact terribly well with processes using large amounts of shared
memory.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PosgreSQL backend process crashed with signal 9
Next
From: D
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #14062: pg_dump dies after dumping first 60 gigabytes of text for large table