I replied to Josh thus:
-----------------------
You need to be careful using Alan's patch. The reason RH stopped using
this part of it in their errata kernels is that it had conflicts with
other stuff, specifically the rmap stuff (he told me that himself in
email).
I am very wary of advising people to use what is essentially an
experimental patch in a production system. This should be a last resort
- a better solution is to have better control over what is running on
your db server, so you can ensure it never gets into an OOM situation.
For mission critical apps I would advise running the postmaster on a
dedicated machine, with no X or other nasty stuff running.
-------------------------
I do have a doc patch ready (with one sensible addition suggested by Jon
Jensen).
andrew
Josh Berkus wrote:
>Andrew,
>
>
>
>>I see btw that no change has been made to the docs. That's bad IMNSHO.
>>The situation with RH is unchanged with today's kernel errata patch,
>>too. I propose to submit a doc patch with the following wording, unless
>>someone objects or improves it:
>>
>>
>
>First, off, I'm crossing this to PGSQL-DOCS, which is the correct list for doc
>patches.
>
>Second, don't you think we should have some mention of the Alan Cox patch?
>
>Otherwise, I think your doc patch is good and needed before we go final.
>When we settle the second question, I'll submit a diff for you.
>
>
>
