Re: Fix pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() 's delay
От | Bharath Rupireddy |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fix pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() 's delay |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALj2ACXtF41DikPSL-DTv4_BH_uT=HzRtz5ziu5ig_OuDkp=vw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fix pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() 's delay (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 5:10 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 12:16:06PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > Perhaps that's so, but it doesn't seem like a good reason not to make > > them more responsive. > > Yeah, that's still some information that the user asked for. Looking > at the things that have a PGPROC entry, should we worry about the main > loop of the logical replication launcher? IMHO, we can support all the processes which return a PGPROC entry by both BackendPidGetProc and AuxiliaryPidGetProc where the AuxiliaryPidGetProc would cover the following processes. I'm not sure one is interested in the memory context info of auxiliary processes. /* * We set aside some extra PGPROC structures for auxiliary processes, * ie things that aren't full-fledged backends but need shmem access. * * Background writer, checkpointer, WAL writer and archiver run during normal * operation. Startup process and WAL receiver also consume 2 slots, but WAL * writer is launched only after startup has exited, so we only need 5 slots. */ #define NUM_AUXILIARY_PROCS 5 Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: