| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com, jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com, john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, noriyoshi(dot)shinoda(at)hpe(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages |
| Date: | 2023-03-20 05:09:09 |
| Message-ID: | 848204.1679288949@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 02:02:19PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>> I slightly prefer using a function for this, as if GUC is used, it can
>> only return "unknown" for the command "postgres -C
>> huge_page_active". However, apart from this advantage, I prefer using
>> a GUC for this information.
> The main advantage of a read-only GUC over a function is that users
> would not need to start a postmaster to know if huge pages would be
> active or not.
I'm confused here, because Horiguchi-san is saying that that
won't work. I've not checked the code lately, but I think that
"postgres -C var" prints its results before actually attempting
to establish shared memory, so I suspect Horiguchi-san is right.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-03-20 05:17:33 | Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-03-20 05:03:13 | Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages |