From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: gibbsr@swebs.com
cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/kernel-resources.html
In-reply-to: <173764274875.1066.17835398570574540295@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
References: <173764274875.1066.17835398570574540295@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:32:28 +0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <216932.1737661757.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:49:17 -0500
Message-ID: <216933.1737661757@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/216933.1737661757%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> I believe, that the export of PG_OOM_ADJUST_FILE should not point to the
> file that the postmaster uses, but should be for example:

> export PG_OOM_ADJUST_FILE=/proc/self/oom_score_adj_child

> As if the example is blindly followed, then postmaster version of the file
> would be updated and become a candidate to be killed.

I don't think so.  In the first place, you misunderstand what
this variable does: it is only consulted by postmaster child
processes not the postmaster itself.  In the second place,
"/proc/self/oom_score_adj_child" isn't universal (it does not
exist on any of the Red-Hat-based distros I checked).

If it were universal and had the semantics that I guess it means from
the name, we could perhaps implement this feature differently and more
simply.  But it's not, and I don't see a lot of value in supporting
two different implementations.

			regards, tom lane