WAL's single point of failure: latest CHECKPOINT record
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | WAL's single point of failure: latest CHECKPOINT record |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21559.983467461@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
As the WAL stuff is currently constructed, the system will refuse to start up unless the checkPoint field of pg_control points at a valid checkpoint record in the WAL log. Now I know we write and fsync the checkpoint record before we rewrite pg_control, but this still leaves me feeling mighty uncomfortable. See past discussions about how fsync order doesn't necessarily mean anything if the disk drive chooses to reorder writes. Since loss of the checkpoint record means complete loss of the database, I think we need to work harder here. What I'm thinking is that pg_control should have pointers to the last two checkpoint records, not only the last one. If we fail to read the most recent checkpoint, try the one before it (which, obviously, means we must keep the log files long enough that we still have that one too). We can run forward from there and redo the intervening WAL records the same as we would do anyway. This would mean an initdb to change the format of pg_control. However I already have a couple other reasons in favor of an initdb: the record-length bug I mentioned yesterday, and the bogus CRC algorithm. I'm not finished reviewing the WAL code, either :-( regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: