Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21243.1335810920@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage() (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes: > When GIN changes a metapage, we WAL-log its ex-header content and never use a > backup block. This reduces WAL volume since the vast majority of the metapage > is unused. However, ginRedoUpdateMetapage() only restores the WAL-logged > content if the metapage LSN predates the WAL record LSN. If a metapage write > tore and updated the LSN but not the other content, we would fail to complete > the update. Instead, unconditionally reinitialize the metapage similar to how > _bt_restore_meta() handles the situation. > I found this problem by code reading and did not attempt to build a test case > illustrating its practical consequences. It's possible that there's no > problem in practice on account of some reason I haven't contemplated. I think there's no problem in practice; the reason is that the GinMetaPageData struct isn't large enough to extend past the first physical sector of the page. So it's in the same disk sector as the LSN and tearing is impossible. Still, this might be a good future-proofing move, in case GinMetaPageData gets larger. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: