Feedback-ID: ia2694551:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 10:40:13 +0100
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
	Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, thomas.munro@gmail.com,
	tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, john.naylor@enterprisedb.com,
	noriyoshi.shinoda@hpe.com, jchampion@timescale.com,
	sawada.mshk@gmail.com, masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, rjuju123@gmail.com,
	Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages
Message-ID: <20230209094013.67varf63bihops33@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20230208231803.GP1653@telsasoft.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230209094013.67varf63bihops33%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-Feb-08, Justin Pryzby wrote:

> I don't think it makes sense to run postgres -C huge_pages_active,
> however, so I see no issue that that would always returns "false".

Hmm, I would initialize it to return "unknown" rather than "off" — and
make sure it turns "off" at the appropriate time.  Otherwise you're just
moving the confusion elsewhere.

> If need be, maybe the documentation could say "indicates whether huge
> pages are active for the running server".

Dunno, that seems way too subtle.

> Does anybody else want to vote for a function rather than a
> RUNTIME_COMPUTED GUC ?

I don't think I'd like to have SELECT show_block_size() et al, so I'd
rather not go that way.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"¿Qué importan los años?  Lo que realmente importa es comprobar que
a fin de cuentas la mejor edad de la vida es estar vivo"  (Mafalda)