Re: Improve monitoring of shared memory allocations

Hi Bilal,

I have a couple of comments, I have only reviewed 0001 so far.
>

Thank you for reviewing!

>
> You may need to run pgindent, it makes some changes.
>

Attached v4-patch has been updated after running pgindent.

+ * If table is shared, calculate the offset at which to find the
> the
> + * first partition of elements
> + */
> +
> + nsegs = compute_buckets_and_segs(nelem, &nbuckets,
> hctl->num_partitions, hctl->ssize);
>
> Blank line between the comment and the code.
>

Removed this.

> /*
> * allocate some new elements and link them into the indicated free list
> */
> -static bool
> -element_alloc(HTAB *hashp, int nelem, int freelist_idx)
> +static HASHELEMENT *
> +element_alloc(HTAB *hashp, int nelem)
>
> Comment needs an update. This function no longer links elements into
> the free list.
>

Updated this and few other comments in the attached v4-patch.

>
> +static int
> +compute_buckets_and_segs(long nelem, int *nbuckets, long
> num_partitions, long ssize)
> +{
> ...
> + /*
> + * In a partitioned table, nbuckets must be at least equal to
> + * num_partitions; were it less, keys with apparently different
> partition
> + * numbers would map to the same bucket, breaking partition
> independence.
> + * (Normally nbuckets will be much bigger; this is just a safety
> check.)
> + */
> + while ((*nbuckets) < num_partitions)
> + (*nbuckets) <<= 1;
>
> I have some worries about this function, I am not sure what I said
> below has real life implications as you already said 'Normally
> nbuckets will be much bigger; this is just a safety check.'.
>
> 1- num_partitions is long and nbuckets is int, so could there be any
> case where num_partition is bigger than MAX_INT and cause an infinite
> loop?
> 2- Although we assume both nbuckets and num_partition initialized as
> the same type, (*nbuckets) <<= 1 will cause an infinite loop if
> num_partition is bigger than MAX_TYPE / 2.
>
> So I think that the solution is to confirm that num_partition <
> MAX_NBUCKETS_TYPE / 2, what do you think?
>
>
Your concern is valid. This has been addressed in the existing code by
calling next_pow2_int() on num_partitions before running the function.
Additionally, I am not adding any new code to the compute_buckets_and_segs
function. I am simply moving part of the init_tab() code into a separate
function
for reuse.

Please find attached the updated and rebased patches.

Thank you,
Rahila Syed