Re: Add tracking of backend memory allocated to pg_stat_activity

On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 at 19:44, Reid Thompson
<reid(dot)thompson(at)crunchydata(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2022-11-27 at 09:40 -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > BTW, these should have some kind of prefix, like PG_ALLOC_* to
> > > avoid causing the same kind of problem for someone else that
> > > another header caused for you by defining something somewhere
> > > called IGNORE (ignore what, I don't know). The other problem was
> > > probably due to a define, though. Maybe instead of an enum, the
> > > function should take a boolean.
> > >
>
> Patch updated to current master and includes above prefix
> recommendation and combining of two function calls to one recommended
> by Ted Yu.
>
> > >
> > > I still wonder whether there needs to be a separate CF entry for
> > > the 0001 patch. One issue is that there's two different lists of
> > > people involved in the threads.
> > >
>
> I'm OK with containing the conversation to one thread if everyone else
> is. If there's no argument against, then patches after today will go
> to the "Add the ability to limit the amount of memory that can be
> allocated to backends" thread
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/bd57d9a4c219cc1392665fd5fba61dde8027b3da.camel@crunchydata.com

The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased patch:
=== Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID
e351f85418313e97c203c73181757a007dfda6d0 ===
=== applying patch
./0001-Add-tracking-of-backend-memory-allocated-to-pg_stat_.patch
patching file src/backend/utils/mmgr/slab.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 69 (offset 16 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 414 (offset 175 lines).
Hunk #3 succeeded at 436 with fuzz 2 (offset 176 lines).
Hunk #4 FAILED at 286.
Hunk #5 succeeded at 488 (offset 186 lines).
Hunk #6 FAILED at 381.
Hunk #7 FAILED at 554.
3 out of 7 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
src/backend/utils/mmgr/slab.c.rej

[1] - http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_41_3865.log

Regards,
Vignesh