Hi, On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 03:23:38PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Something like that. But I think it should be "align the size of ...", > we're not aligning the start. > > >> - There's a comment at the end which talks about "ignored segments". > >> IMHO that type of information should be in the function comment, > >> but I'm > >> also not quite sure I understand what "output shared memory" is ... > > > > I think that comes from the comments that are already in > > pg_get_shmem_allocations(). > > > > I think that those are located here and worded that way to ease to > > understand > > what is not in with pg_get_shmem_allocations_numa() if one look at both > > functions. That said, I'm +1 to put this kind of comments in the function > > comment. > > > > OK. But I'm still not sure what "output shared memory" is about. Can you > explain what shmem segments are not included?
Looking at pg_get_shmem_allocations() and the pg_shmem_allocations view documentation, I would say the wording is linked to "anonymous allocations" and "unused memory" (i.e the ones reported with <anonymous> or NULL as name in the pg_shmem_allocations view). Using output in this comment sounds confusing while it makes sense in pg_get_shmem_allocations() because it really reports those. I think that we could just mention in the function comment that pg_get_shmem_allocations_numa() does not handle anonymous allocations and unused memory. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
