Re: File leak?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: File leak? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26133.1087216966@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: File leak? (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes: > I'm afraid that's not enough. Checkpoints spoil it, think: > 1. CREATE TABLE foobar ... > 2. INSERT .... > 3. <checkpoint> > 4. <crash> > The replay would not see the file-creation WAL record. Good point. That makes it messy enough that we probably don't want to do it that way. Scan-for-unreferenced-files is looking a lot more robust (although it has its own interesting race-condition issues if you try to do it in a live system). >> I'm not sure what the performance implications of this would be; it's >> likely that pushing the cost somewhere else would be better. > I don't think that file creation is that common for it to matter.. Maybe not for regular tables, but for temp tables I'm less convinced. If we could do the unreferenced-file scan only at completion of a crash recovery then it'd be zero cost in all normal paths ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: