Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-10-24 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >>> [ oom_score_adj business ] > >> Did we do anything about this?  Anyone else have an opinion on what >> ought to be done? > > I held off doing anything because it didn't seem like we had consensus. > OTOH, it may well be th

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-10-24 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: >> [ oom_score_adj business ] > Did we do anything about this? Anyone else have an opinion on what > ought to be done? I held off doing anything because it didn't seem like we had consensus. OTOH, it may well be that it's not important enough to demand real consensus, and he

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-10-24 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Dan McGee wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Dan McGee wrote: >>> [ patch ] >> >> I suppose it's Tom who really needs to comment on this, but I'm not >> too enthusiastic about this approach.  Duplicati

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-09-26 Thread Dan McGee
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Dan McGee wrote: >> [ patch ] > > I suppose it's Tom who really needs to comment on this, but I'm not > too enthusiastic about this approach.  Duplicating the Linux kernel > calculation into our code means that

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-09-23 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Dan McGee wrote: > [ patch ] I suppose it's Tom who really needs to comment on this, but I'm not too enthusiastic about this approach. Duplicating the Linux kernel calculation into our code means that we could drift if the formula changes again. I like Tom's pre

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-09-19 Thread Dan McGee
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Dan McGee wrote: > This is one way to prevent the kernel warning message without having to > introduce a new constant. Scale the old oom_adj-style value the same way > the kernel internally does it and use that instead if oom_score_adj is > available for writing. >

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Use new oom_score_adj without a new compile-time constant

2011-09-19 Thread Dan McGee
This is one way to prevent the kernel warning message without having to introduce a new constant. Scale the old oom_adj-style value the same way the kernel internally does it and use that instead if oom_score_adj is available for writing. Signed-off-by: Dan McGee --- This addresses some of the c