On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 2014-06-10 11:14:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Sure, but what's that have to do with this? Any Red Hat or PGDG RPM will
>> come with this code already enabled in the build, so there is no need for
>> anyone to have a GUC to play around with the behavior.
>
> That's imo a fair point. Unless I misunderstand things Gurjeet picked
> the topic up again because he wants to increase the priority of the
> children. Is that correct Gurjeet?
Yes. A DBA would like to prevent the postmaster from being killed by
OOM killer, but let the child processes be still subject to OOM
killer's whim.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com
