From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_shmem_allocations view |
Date: | 2014-08-15 05:16:31 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQFcNk=Ticob8qtO26++42+07NDqeDgx03dHDb3wJL2kQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-08-15 05:45:16 | improving speed of make check-world |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2014-08-15 03:40:05 | Re: option -T in pg_basebackup doesn't work on windows |