Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 10:59:32 +0200 From: "Ronald Klop" <ronald-lists@klop.ws> To: "David Magda" <dmagda@ee.ryerson.ca> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: protecting some processes from out-of-swap killer Message-ID: <op.xxwdxighkndu52@ronaldradial.radialsg.local> In-Reply-To: <61abe503a5bc8550e1413fd1933bea62.squirrel@webmail.ee.ryerson.ca> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1504251316020.43520@woozle.rinet.ru> <20150425104336.GD13141@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1504251407420.43520@woozle.rinet.ru> <op.xxsqzdq1kndu52@ronaldradial.radialsg.local> <61abe503a5bc8550e1413fd1933bea62.squirrel@webmail.ee.ryerson.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 19:09:05 +0200, David Magda <dmagda@ee.ryerson.ca> wrote: > On Tue, April 28, 2015 05:51, Ronald Klop wrote: > >> The OS trying to kill a process is probably not what you want. So when >> you >> protect(1) postgres the OS will kill another process, which I hope is >> not >> running without reason. >> My advice would be to >> - or increase your swap space >> - or tune postgresql to use less memory >> - or limit tmpfs (tmpfs uses swap if RAM is short) >> - or tune zfs to use less memory > > Personally I didn't even know FreeBSD had an OOM killer. I regularly run > into Linux's though, but that's because by default Linux allows > over-committing of memory. > > I was under the impression that FreeBSD did not over-subscribe memory, > and > so would not allow a process to do a malloc() unless there was enough > RAM+swap to satisfy it. > > Is this a mistaken assumption? (I probably have to buy the McKusick, > Neville-Neil, Watson book.) > > See sysctl vm.overcommit, which is also documented here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/SystemTuning and in man tuning(7). Regards, Ronald.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.xxwdxighkndu52>