Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry
Date: 2024-01-17 02:30:00
Message-ID: CALj2ACWuiAm7Rr13PFfaiQfOHUoCbJOJvU72jyLnj4xfoEOAEg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 9:37 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> The autoprewarm change (0003) does use this variable. I considered making
> it optional (i.e., you could pass in NULL if you didn't want it), but I
> didn't feel like the extra code in GetNamedDSMSegment() to allow this was
> worth it so that callers could avoid creating a single bool.

I'm okay with it.

The v8 patches look good to me.

--
Bharath Rupireddy
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 John Naylor 2024-01-17 02:37:18 Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Previous Message Maiquel Grassi 2024-01-17 02:28:09 RE: New Window Function: ROW_NUMBER_DESC() OVER() ?