* Erik Rijkers (e...@xs4all.nl) wrote: > On Tue, February 4, 2014 18:56, Christian Kruse wrote: > > On 04/02/14 17:41, Erik Rijkers wrote: > >> 2014-02-04 10:34:25.376 CET 29133 LOG: server process (PID 29459) was > >> terminated by signal 9: Killed > > > > Did you check if this was the OOM killer? Should be logged in dmesg. > > I would be surprised if it wasn't. (no access to that machine at the moment) > > How do we regard such crashes? It seems to me this was rather eaasily > 'provoked' (for want of a better word). > > I am inclined to blame the patch...
It sounds like there is at least some investigation which should happen
here to see why we're using so much memory (well beyond work_mem and
even maint_work_mem it sounds like), but it would also be good to have
the machine reconfigured to not allow OOM killing.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
