On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 8:49 AM David Geier <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> what GetMemoryChunkSpace() works on IIUC. > >>> Am i correct here? > >> That's interesting an interesting realization. You're right that we > >> cannot use GetMemoryChunkSpace() in that case. > >> > >> However, I'm wondering if the better approach wouldn't be to change fd.c > >> to use a long-lived memory context. Then all bookkeeping would happen > >> automatically and the memory size could simply be reported via existing > >> memory context stats infrastructure. > >> > >> Not entirely sure though if there's some roadblock when switching to a > >> memory context. > > I don't see any issue with this either. However, the only benefit we > would > > gain is using existing infrastructure but only for backend vfd cache > memory > > (i.e cache_bytes). > > Everything else stays the same (counters, cluster-wide memory); > therefore, > > if there's no other benefit to replacing with memory contexts, maybe it's > > not worth it. > > The biggest benefit in my view is consistency with the rest of PostgreSQL. > That is from a usage point of view as well as from a coding point of view. > If you want, I can give that a try and share a patch with you if > successful. > Yes of course, I’d be happy to take a look. Regards, Ayoub
