Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:43:36 +0200
From:      Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: protecting some processes from out-of-swap killer
Message-ID:  <20150425104336.GD13141@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1504251316020.43520@woozle.rinet.ru>
References:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1504251316020.43520@woozle.rinet.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--rqzD5py0kzyFAOWN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 01:31:14PM +0300, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Hi there colleagues,
>=20
> I have stable/10 on a rather big machine (2*8*2 e5 Xeon, 64G RAM, SAS+SSD=
 ZFS=20
> raid10+ZIL+L2ARC) acting as a PostgreSQL server.=20
>=20
> To use such a big resource pool that is mostly idle, I'd deployed poudrie=
re=20
> there (using tmpfs) too.
>=20
> Most times this combination works like a charm: LA could be 60+ and no vi=
sual=20
> latency increase on SQL queries.
>=20
> However, sometimes postgres processes got killed by 'out of swap space'. =
=20
> I suppose the source of problem could be that VSZ size of postgres proces=
ses=20
> (8-9 G) is bigger than swap congigured (4G).
>=20
> Is there any way to prevent this, besides reallocating space for swap?
>=20
> Quick googling does not help, at least I could not find answers relevant=
=20
> enough.
>=20
> Thanks!

protect(1) ?

Best regards,
Bapt

--rqzD5py0kzyFAOWN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iEYEARECAAYFAlU7b9gACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EyPWgCdG6jHIEs8UyIPhQDJZ0AAMknP
3BQAnivyrsSl79NCoyA4gKNoCOj7NovQ
=BDgz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--rqzD5py0kzyFAOWN--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150425104336.GD13141>