Re: FSM, now without WAL-logging
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FSM, now without WAL-logging |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10998.1222288601@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FSM, now without WAL-logging (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: > Hmm. The smgrtuncate WAL record is generated after the file is > truncated, so there's still a small window there, where we can be left > with a truncated main fork, but no smgrtruncate record for it, and thus > the page of the FSM representing the truncated blocks doesn't get zeroed > at replay. Hmm. I seem to recall that that ordering was intentional, but I don't recall why just now. The code doesn't say but maybe there's something in the archives. It does seem a little odd since it's an apparent violation of the wal-before-data rule. If you wanted to be certain that the WAL record existed you'd have to not only generate it first but fsync it, which would be a bit of a performance hit. OTOH I'm not sure we care about smgrtruncate being really quick... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: