Re: Add os_page_num to pg_buffercache

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Mircea Cadariu <cadariu(dot)mircea(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Add os_page_num to pg_buffercache
Date: 2025-11-24 05:35:32
Message-ID: aSPupBPh1_dXwgLV@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Nov 23, 2025 at 09:15:31AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Attached a rebase due to 7d9043aee80. Also 0003 has a minor change (as compared
> to v8-0004) to avoid this error when creating the 1.6 version with the new code:

Yes, sorry, I forgot to mention that part. I have played with the
patch for a couple of hours, fixed a couple of issues, rewording and
tweaking things while browsing the whole (typedefs.list was incorrect,
docs were partially incorrect), and applied the result. I did not see
a point in 0001, as well, because the refactored "internal" function
we'd have just one caller for the proposed macro and function.

The original function pg_buffercache_numa_pages could be dropped when
upgrading to v1.7 now that the view pg_buffercache_numa relies on the
new SQL function pg_buffercache_os_pages(boolean), but I could not be
really excited about that.. We could add a DROP FUNCTION, of course.

By the way, thanks for the effort of splitting up things. This was
super useful for the review and when dealing with each part of the
proposed changes.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2025-11-24 05:46:29 Re: Add pg_buffercache_mark_dirty[_all] functions to the pg_buffercache
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2025-11-24 05:00:13 Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)