Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes?
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20221028220700.hub34q3e2ganouja@awork3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes? (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2022-10-28 11:09:38 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 03:58:25PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > The block sizes don't need to match, do they? As long as the block is properly > > aligned, we can change the iov_len of the final iov to match whatever the size > > is being passed in, no? > > Hmm. Based on what Bharath has written upthread, it does not seem to > matter if the size of the aligned block changes, either: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACUccjR7KbKqWOsQmqH1ZGEDyJ7hH5Ef+DOhcv7+kOnjCQ@mail.gmail.com > > I am honestly not sure whether it is a good idea to make file_utils.c > depend on one of the compile-time page sizes in this routine, be it > the page size of the WAL page size, as pg_write_zeros() would be used > for some rather low-level operations. But we could as well just use a > locally-defined structure with a buffer at 4kB or 8kB and call it a > day? Shrug. I don't think we gain much by having yet another PGAlignedXYZBlock. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: