Thread
-
Re: Add os_page_num to pg_buffercache
Mircea Cadariu <cadariu.mircea@gmail.com> — 2025-07-09T09:51:16Z
Hi, Thanks for the prompt reply! On 09/07/2025 08:37, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > Yeah, I tried to avoid code duplication for the "os pages" related stuff in > v1. I can check if more can be done (outside of the "os pages" related stuff). > > Might be done in a dedicated patch though, I mean I don't think that should be > a blocker for this one. Agreed, if there's any low-hanging fruit to address now that this file is cracked open, then great. Otherwise, makes sense to leave it for a separate dedicated patch. If you don't mind I have some further questions on the patch, see below. > + if (get_call_result_type(fcinfo, NULL, &expected_tupledesc) != TYPEFUNC_COMPOSITE) > + elog(ERROR, "return type must be a row type"); Is this needed in the new pg_buffercache_os_pages function? I noticed this check also in the "original" pg_buffercache_pages. There's a comment there indicating that (if I understand correctly) its purpose is to handle upgrades from version 1.0, mentioning a field unrelated to this patch. If it's needed, shall we consider adding a similar comment as in pg_buffercache_pages? > + /* > + * Different database block sizes (4kB, 8kB, ..., 32kB) can be used, > + * while the OS may have different memory page sizes. > + * > + * To correctly map between them, we need to: 1. Determine the OS > + * memory page size 2. Calculate how many OS pages are used by all > + * buffer blocks 3. Calculate how many OS pages are contained within > + * each database block. > + */ For step number 3 - should it be the other way around: database blocks are contained within OS pages? Kind regards, Mircea Cadariu