Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels
Date: 2014-06-10 15:29:58
Message-ID: 30893.1402414198@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im> writes:
> As it stands right now, a user can decrease the likelyhood of
> Postmaster being killed by adjusting the start script, but that
> decreases the likelyhood of al the child processes, too, making the
> Postmaster just as likely as a kill-candidate, maybe even higher
> because it's the parent, as any backend.

Exactly.

> This patch gives the user a control to let the backend's likelyhood of
> being killed be different/higher than that of the postmaster.

If you think your users might want to give the postmaster OOM-exemption,
why don't you just activate the existing code when you build? Resetting
the OOM setting to zero is safe whether or not the startup script did
anything to the postmaster's setting.

In short, I don't see what a GUC adds here, except uncertainty, which
is not a good thing.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-06-10 15:33:47 Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels
Previous Message Andres Freund 2014-06-10 15:24:19 Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels