On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> I thought you were printing actual pointer addresses. If you're just
>> printing offsets relative to wherever the segment happens to be
>> mapped, I don't care about that.
>
> Well, that just means that it's not an *obvious* security risk.
>
> I still like the idea of providing something comparable to
> MemoryContextStats, rather than creating a SQL interface. The problem
> with a SQL interface is you can't interrogate it unless (1) you are not
> already inside a query and (2) the client is interactive and under your
> control. Something you can call easily from gdb is likely to be much
> more useful in practice.
Since the shared memory segment isn't changing at runtime, I don't see
this as being a big problem. It could possibly be an issue for
dynamic shared memory segments, though.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
