Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs
Date
Msg-id ZmX8sSw8ZiS4tNDL@nathan
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 02:51:42PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 03:31:53PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I do think the name could use some more thought, though.
>> semaphores_required would end up being the same kind of thing as
>> shared_memory_size_in_huge_pages, but the names seem randomly
>> different. If semaphores_required is right here, why isn't
>> shared_memory_required used there? Seems more like we ought to call
>> this semaphores or os_semaphores or num_semaphores or
>> num_os_semaphores or something.
> 
> I'm fine with any of your suggestions.  If I _had_ to pick one, I'd
> probably choose num_os_semaphores because it's the most descriptive.

Here's a new version of the patch with the GUC renamed to
num_os_semaphores.

-- 
nathan

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "cca5507"
Date:
Subject: Historic snapshot doesn't track txns committed in BUILDING_SNAPSHOT state
Next
From: Joseph Koshakow
Date:
Subject: Re: Wrong security context for deferred triggers?