Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3)
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobvG7D0aetpo56aSUV00FF0aTWUAXh7j5tS9BJ=YHF+yA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
>> At 2013-11-15 15:17:32 +0200, hlinnakangas@vmware.com wrote:
>
>> > But I'm not wedded to the idea if someone objects; a log message might
>> > also be reasonable: "LOG: huge TLB pages are not supported on this
>> > platform, but huge_tlb_pages was 'on'"
>>
>> Put that way, I have to wonder if the right thing to do is just to have
>> a "try_huge_pages=on|off" setting, and log a warning if the attempt did
>> not succeed. It would be easier to document, and I don't think there's
>> much point in making it an error if the allocation fails.
>
> What about
> huge_tlb_pages={off,try}
>
> Or maybe
> huge_tlb_pages={off,try,require}

I'd spell "require" as "on", or at least accept that as a synonym.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Data corruption issues using streaming replication on 9.0.14/9.2.5/9.3.1
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: COMMENT ON CONSTRAINT ON DOMAIN ?