Horton

Re: pgsql: Introduce pg_shmem_allocations_numa view

Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>

View thread
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@postgresql.org>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2025-07-01T11:03:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Handle EPERM in pg_numa_init

  2. Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS into pg_numa_query_pages

  3. Silence valgrind about pg_numa_touch_mem_if_required

  4. Limit the size of numa_move_pages requests

  5. Introduce pg_shmem_allocations_numa view

On 7/1/25 06:06, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 08:56:43PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> In particular it now uses "chunking" instead of "batching". I believe
>> bathing is "combining multiple requests into a single one", but we're
>> doing exactly the opposite - splitting a large request into smaller
>> ones. Which is what "chunking" does.
> 
> I do agree that "chuncking" is more appropriate here.
> 
>> I plan to push this tomorrow morning.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> LGTM, just 2 nit about the commit messages:
> 
> For 0001:
> 
> Is it worth to add a link to the Kernel Bug report or mentioned it can be
> found in the discussion?
> 
> For 0003:
> 
> "
> But with the chunking, introduced to work around the do_pages_stat()
> bug"
> 
> Do you have in mind to quote the hex commit object name that will be generated
> by 0001?
> 

Thanks! Pushed, with both adjustments (link to kernel thread, adding the
commit hash).

But damn it, right after pushing I noticed two typos in the second
commit message :-/

-- 
Tomas Vondra