On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2014-06-10 11:14:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Sure, but what's that have to do with this? Any Red Hat or PGDG RPM will >> come with this code already enabled in the build, so there is no need for >> anyone to have a GUC to play around with the behavior. > > That's imo a fair point. Unless I misunderstand things Gurjeet picked > the topic up again because he wants to increase the priority of the > children. Is that correct Gurjeet?
Yes. A DBA would like to prevent the postmaster from being killed by OOM killer, but let the child processes be still subject to OOM killer's whim. Best regards, -- Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/ EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
