Re: pg_shmem_allocations view - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_shmem_allocations view
Date
Msg-id 15777.1399405475@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_shmem_allocations view  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pg_shmem_allocations view
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> FWIW, I vote for fixing (a) now but holding (b) for 9.5.

> I guess I'll vote for applying both.  I don't see a lot of risk, and I
> think doing one with out the other is somewhat pointless.

The difference is that there's not consensus about the details of the
views ... as borne out by your next paragraph.

Now admittedly, we could always redefine the views in 9.5, but
I'd rather not be doing this sort of thing in haste.  Something
as user-visible as a system view really ought to have baked awhile
before we ship it.  Patch (a) is merely institutionalizing the
expectation that DSM segments should have names, which is a much
lower-risk bet.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Next
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pgindent run for 9.4