From: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Can't find thread on Linux memory overcommit
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:09:25 +0530
Message-ID: <200308211309.25163.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F43BD9F.3050205@dunslane.net>
References: <200308201102.37559.josh@agliodbs.com>
<3F43BD9F.3050205@dunslane.net>
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 23:57, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-07/msg00608.php
>
> Subject is "reprise on Linux overcommit handling" - is that too
> deceptive? :-)
I did little searching on this and found..
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0306.3/1647.html
Can anybody comment on how much diference 2.6 would make to this situation of
OOM kiiler "feature"?
If there could be any cross-OS comparisons, that would be great as well. A
summary would really help.
Shridhar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Can't find thread on Linux memory overcommit
In-Reply-To: <200308211309.25163.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox