Re: pg_shmem_allocations view

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_shmem_allocations view
Date: 2014-08-18 18:12:57
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZHzY2vSoLmqV4riaRfES+Y4LkKR5Z8U0GwqPJRYFa-oQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I thought you were printing actual pointer addresses. If you're just
>> printing offsets relative to wherever the segment happens to be
>> mapped, I don't care about that.
>
> Well, that just means that it's not an *obvious* security risk.
>
> I still like the idea of providing something comparable to
> MemoryContextStats, rather than creating a SQL interface. The problem
> with a SQL interface is you can't interrogate it unless (1) you are not
> already inside a query and (2) the client is interactive and under your
> control. Something you can call easily from gdb is likely to be much
> more useful in practice.

Since the shared memory segment isn't changing at runtime, I don't see
this as being a big problem. It could possibly be an issue for
dynamic shared memory segments, though.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2014-08-18 19:05:09 Re: Reporting the commit LSN at commit time
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-08-18 17:40:55 Re: pg_dump refactor patch to remove global variables