On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 11:53 AM Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 10:09:26AM +0200, Jakub Wartak wrote: > > Bertrand noticed this first in > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z/FhOOCmTxuB2h0b%40ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal > > : > > > > - startptr = (char *) BufferGetBlock(1); > > + startptr = (char *) TYPEALIGN_DOWN(os_page_size, (char > > *) BufferGetBlock(1)); > > > > With the above I'm also not getting wonky (-1) results anymore. The > > rest of reply assumes we are using this. > > yeah, I can see that you added it in v25-0007. In the same message I mentioned > to "use the actual buffer address when pg_numa_touch_mem_if_required() > is called?" > > So, to be extra cautious we could do something like: > > @@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ pg_buffercache_numa_pages(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) > > /* Only need to touch memory once per backend > process lifetime */ > if (firstNumaTouch) > - pg_numa_touch_mem_if_required(touch, > os_page_ptrs[idx]); > + pg_numa_touch_mem_if_required(touch, > buffptr + (j * os_page_size)); > > > what do you think?
Yeah, I think we could include this too as it looks safer (sry I've missed that one). Attached v25 as it was , with this little tweak. -J.
v25-0003-Introduce-pg_shmem_allocations_numa-view.patch
Description: Binary data
v25-0004-adjust-page-alignment.patch
Description: Binary data
v25-0001-Add-pg_buffercache_numa-view-with-NUMA-node-info.patch
Description: Binary data
v25-0005-fixes-for-review-by-Andres.patch
Description: Binary data
v25-0006-fix-remaining-outstanding-issues-from-Sunday.patch
Description: Binary data
v25-0002-adjust-page_num.patch
Description: Binary data
