[rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ broker's death by one cut: robustness problem

• Previous message: [rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ broker's death by one cut: robustness problem
• Next message: [rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ broker's death by one cut: robustness problem
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
> Lev Walkin wrote:
>> Better have erlang killed with OOM than box killed because of kernel
>> panic, or because sshd is killed (when OOM is disabled just for the beam
>> process) and you can never reach your machine again.
> 
> Perhaps ulimit can be of use here, to control the size of beam
> independently of the rest of the system?

This solves sshd killing, but does not solve inability to cope with
broken persister log when beam finally dies due to reaching ulimit.

-- 
Lev Walkin
vlm at lionet.info

• Previous message: [rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ broker's death by one cut: robustness problem
• Next message: [rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ broker's death by one cut: robustness problem
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]