Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs
От | Nathan Bossart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZmITToZYnHJsMfWH@nathan обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: problems with "Shared Memory and Semaphores" section of docs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 03:31:53PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > I don't really like making this a GUC, but what's the other option? > It's reasonable for people to want to ask the server how many > resources it will need to start, and -C is the only tool we have for > that right now. So I feel like this is a fair thing to do. Yeah, this is how I feel, too. > 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. -- nathan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: