Re: PGC_SIGHUP shared_buffers?

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PGC_SIGHUP shared_buffers?
Date: 2024-02-19 18:54:01
Message-ID: f4ad3382-2240-4776-8e03-d9b4ab1a1302@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/19/24 13:13, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2024-02-19 09:19:16 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
>> Couldn't we scale the rounding, e.g. allow small allocations as we do now,
>> but above some number always round? E.g. maybe >= 2GB round to the nearest
>> 256MB, >= 4GB round to the nearest 512MB, >= 8GB round to the nearest 1GB,
>> etc?
>
> That'd make the translation considerably more expensive. Which is important,
> given how common an operation this is.

Perhaps it is not practical, doesn't help, or maybe I misunderstand, but
my intent was that the rounding be done/enforced when setting the GUC
value which surely cannot be that often.

--
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthias van de Meent 2024-02-19 19:32:19 Re: Proposal: Adjacent B-Tree index
Previous Message Andres Freund 2024-02-19 18:13:09 Re: PGC_SIGHUP shared_buffers?