Horton

Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih@amazon.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-06-09T19:04:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 02:51:42PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 03:31:53PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I do think the name could use some more thought, though.
>> semaphores_required would end up being the same kind of thing as
>> shared_memory_size_in_huge_pages, but the names seem randomly
>> different. If semaphores_required is right here, why isn't
>> shared_memory_required used there? Seems more like we ought to call
>> this semaphores or os_semaphores or num_semaphores or
>> num_os_semaphores or something.
> 
> I'm fine with any of your suggestions.  If I _had_ to pick one, I'd
> probably choose num_os_semaphores because it's the most descriptive.

Here's a new version of the patch with the GUC renamed to
num_os_semaphores.

-- 
nathan

Commits

  1. Introduce num_os_semaphores GUC.

  2. Fix documentation for POSIX semaphores.

  3. Fix documentation for System V semaphores.