# Sidekiq warnings
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166
**Category:** Support
**Tags:** sidekiq
**Created:** [June 14, 2025, 9:21am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166 "2025-06-14T09:21:22Z")
**Posts on this page:** 7
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Ethsim2](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ethsim2)
#### Post date: [June 14, 2025, 9:21am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/1 "2025-06-14T09:21:23Z")
in a virtual server with 8GB RAM, i don’t suppose sidekiq using slightly more than 500M is an issue?
* * *
i’m interested whether to add the following line in my `app.yml`
```plaintext
env:
UNICORN_SIDEKIQ_MEMORY_KILLER_MAX_RSS: 1024
```
---
### Author:  [@Jagster](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Jagster)
#### Post date: [June 14, 2025, 4:27pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/2 "2025-06-14T16:27:07Z")
Tot RAM doesn’t help here. It is kind of same thing than with amount of workers in the PHP-world and how much memory is allocated. Well, totally different thing, but yet 😂
My experiances are saying that 500 is enough for totally fresh installs, when there isn’t practically any components and plugins in use, nor users. 550+ at least is needed.
---
### Author:  [@Ethsim2](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ethsim2)
#### Post date: [July 12, 2025, 9:39am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/3 "2025-07-12T09:39:32Z")
my last rebuild worked, with `700` set for this
---
### Author:  [@Ethsim2](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ethsim2)
#### Post date: [July 13, 2025, 9:28am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/4 "2025-07-13T09:28:09Z")
it’s strange that i’m still getting warning, the previous one / before the `app.yml` change was 0.1MB higher
---
### Author:  [@Ed\_S](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ed_S)
#### Post date: [July 13, 2025, 5:13pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/5 "2025-07-13T17:13:40Z")
In this other thread I see a different setting is mentioned
[Sidekiq is consuming too much memory](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-is-consuming-too-much-memory/280933)
> [@Sidekiq is consuming too much memory, restarting](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-is-consuming-too-much-memory-restarting/48395/40):
>
> on mega busy multisites you need to adjust `UNICORN_SIDEKIQ_MAX_RSS`
But I also see an unresolved similar situation relatively recently in
[Sidekiq is consuming too much memory even with UNICORN\_SIDEKIQ\_MAX\_RSS adjusted](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-is-consuming-too-much-memory-even-with-unicorn-sidekiq-max-rss-adjusted/284010)
---
### Author:  [@Ethsim2](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ethsim2)
#### Post date: [July 17, 2025, 9:36am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/6 "2025-07-17T09:36:16Z")
`memory overcommit must be enabled`
? from the rebuild process
---
### Author:  [@Ed\_S](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ed_S)
#### Post date: [July 17, 2025, 1:11pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/sidekiq-warnings/370166/7 "2025-07-17T13:11:28Z")
Yes, I’ve always run with memory overcommit, and posted about it several times. Others also run this way, but I have the feeling that it’s not understood and accepted enough to have made it into official scripts or recipes.
(I’ve also disabled transparent huge pages, but that’s a mere performance issue, rather than a make-or-break for small-memory systems.)