Re: Creating a function for exposing memory usage of backend process

From: Kasahara Tatsuhito <kasahara(dot)tatsuhito(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Creating a function for exposing memory usage of backend process
Date: 2020-07-30 06:13:51
Message-ID: CAP0=ZVJ2JPS41CffcG-E2CnBkfOjFRa4YoKB=A8vbWGkjEtA1w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 5:32 PM torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
> - whether information for identifying parent-child relation is necessary
> or it's an overkill
I think it's important to understand the parent-child relationship of
the context.
Personally, I often want to know the following two things ..

- In which life cycle is the target context? (Remaining as long as the
process is living? per query?)
- Does the target context belong to the correct (parent) context?

> - if this information is necessary, memory address is suitable or other
> means like assigning unique numbers are required
IMO, If each context can be uniquely identified (or easily guessed) by
"name" and "ident",
then I don't think the address information is necessary.
Instead, I like the way that directly shows the context name of the
parent, as in the 0005 patch.

Best regards

--
Tatsuhito Kasahara
kasahara.tatsuhito _at_ gmail.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-07-30 06:32:46 Re: INSERT INTO SELECT, Why Parallelism is not selected?
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2020-07-30 05:50:20 Re: Reducing WaitEventSet syscall churn