Horton

Re: Parent/child context relation in pg_get_backend_memory_contexts()

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: Melih Mutlu <m.melihmutlu@gmail.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, torikoshia <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-07-10T21:19:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 4:06 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been wondering about the order of the "path" column.  When we
> talked, I had in mind that the TopMemoryContext should always be at
> the end of the array rather than the start, but I see you've got it
> the other way around.

FWIW, I would have done what Melih did. A path normally is listed in
root-to-leaf order, not leaf-to-root.

> I also imagined "path" would be called "context_ids". I thought that
> might better indicate what the column is without consulting the
> documentation.

The only problem I see with this is that it doesn't make it clear that
we're being shown parentage or ancestry, rather than values for the
current node. I suspect path is fairly understandable, but if you
don't like that, what about parent_ids?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Commits

  1. Add missing pointer dereference in pg_backend_memory_contexts view

  2. Add path column to pg_backend_memory_contexts view

  3. Allow memory contexts to have both fixed and variable ident strings.