Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, thomas.munro@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, john.naylor@enterprisedb.com, noriyoshi.shinoda@hpe.com, jchampion@timescale.com, sawada.mshk@gmail.com, masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, rjuju123@gmail.com
Date: 2023-03-09T20:15:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Greetings, * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org) wrote: > On 2023-Mar-09, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 09:34:10AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > + Reports whether huge pages are in use by the current instance. > > > > + See <xref linkend="guc-huge-pages"/> for more information. > > > > > > > > I still think we should say "server" in place of "current instance" here. > > > > > > We certainly use 'server' a lot more in config.sgml than we do > > > 'instance'. "currently running server" might be closer to how we > > > describe a running PG system in other parts (we talk about "currently > > > running server processes", "while the server is running", "When running > > > a standby server", "when the server is running"; "instance" is used much > > > less and seems to more typically refer to 'state of files on disk' in my > > > reading vs. 'actively running process' though there's some of each). > > > > I called it "instance" since the GUC has no meaning when it's not > > running. I'm fine to rename it to "running server". > > I'd rather make all these other places use "instance" instead. We used > to consider these terms interchangeable, but since we introduced the > glossary to unify the terminology, they are no longer supposed to be. > A server (== a machine) can contain many instances, and each individual > instance in the server could be using huge pages or not. Perhaps, but then the references to instance should probably also be changed since there's certainly some that are referring to a set of data files and not to backend processes, eg: ###### The <literal>shutdown</literal> setting is useful to have the instance ready at the exact replay point desired. The instance will still be able to replay more WAL records (and in fact will have to replay WAL records since the last checkpoint next time it is started). ###### Not sure about just changing one thing at a time though or using the 'right' term when introducing things while having the 'wrong' term be used next to it. Also not saying that this patch should be responsible for fixing everything either. 'Server' in the glossary does explicitly say it could be used when referring to an 'instance' too though, so 'running server' doesn't seem to be entirely wrong. Thanks, Stephen
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add GUC parameter "huge_pages_status"
- a14354cac0e3 17.0 landed
-
Add check on initial and boot values when loading GUCs
- a73952b79563 16.0 cited
-
Clean up some inconsistencies with GUC declarations
- d9d873bac670 16.0 cited
-
Clean up some GUC declarations and comments
- 7d25958453a6 16.0 cited