Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoY7Jh-qK8_w4jP2Ji26npxAMRUf5GmCXqTrfeS4N+aJGg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?  ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>)
Responses Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:49 PM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I agree.  What about
> huge_pages_needed_for_shared_memory_size or
> huge_pages_needed_for_main_shared_memory?  I'm still not stoked about
> using "required" or "needed" in the name, as it sounds like huge pages
> must be allocated for the server to run, which is only true if
> huge_pages=on.  I haven't thought of a better word to use, though.

I prefer the first of those to the second. I don't find it
particularly better or worse than my previous suggestion of
shared_memory_size_in_huge_pages.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: .ready and .done files considered harmful
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?