On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:15 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > I agree that thats a very narrow use case. And I'm not sure the use case > of > > a running server is even that important here - it's really the offline > one > > that's important. Or rather, the really compelling one is when there is a > > server running but I want to check the value offline because it will > > change. SHOW doesn't help there because it shows the value based on the > > currently running configuration, not the new one after a restart. > > You mean the case of a server where one would directly change > postgresql.conf on a running server, and use postgres -C to see how > much the kernel settings need to be changed before the restart? > Yes. AIUI that was the original use-case for this feature. It certainly was for me :) > Hmm. So what's the solution on windows? I guess maybe it's not as > important > > there because there is no limit on huge pages, but generally getting the > > expected shared memory usage might be useful? Just significantly less > > important. > > Contrary to Linux, we don't need to care about the number of large > pages that are necessary because there is no equivalent of > vm.nr_hugepages on Windows (see [1]), do we? If that were the case, > we'd have a use case for huge_page_size, additionally. > Right, for this one in particular -- that's what I meant with my comment about there not being a limit. But this feature works for other settings as well, not just the huge pages one. Exactly what the use-cases are can vary, but surely they would have the same problems wrt redirects? -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
