Re: pg_shmem_allocations view
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-08-15T05:16:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
And here are some comments about patch 2: - Patch applies with some hunks. - Some typos are present s#memory segments..#memory segments. (double dots) s#NULL#<literal>NULL</> (in the docs as this refers to a value) - Your thoughts about providing separate patches for each view? What this patch does is straight-forward, but pg_shmem_allocations does not actually depend on the first patch adding size and name to the dsm fields. So IMO it makes sense to separate each feature properly. - off should be renamed to offset for pg_get_shmem_allocations. - Is it really worth showing unused shared memory? I'd rather rip out the last portion of pg_get_shmem_allocations. - For refcnt in pg_get_dynamic_shmem_allocations, could you add a comment mentioning that refcnt = 1 means that the item is moribund and 0 is unused, and that reference count for active dsm segments only begins from 2? I would imagine that this is enough, instead of using some define's defining the ID from which a dsm item is considered as active. Regards, -- Michael
Commits
-
Add pg_shmem_allocations view.
- ed10f32e37e9 13.0 landed