Re: pg_shmem_allocations view
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_shmem_allocations view |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqQFcNk=Ticob8qtO26++42+07NDqeDgx03dHDb3wJL2kQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_shmem_allocations view (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_shmem_allocations view
|
Список | 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
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: