Re: [HACKERS] The dangers of "-F"
От | Vadim Mikheev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] The dangers of "-F" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3772D902.B048E6C1@krs.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] The dangers of "-F" (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] The dangers of "-F"
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > For instance, if there are assumptions that all data blocks are > > > written before this fact is recorded in a log file, then > > > "write data blocks" "fsynch" "write log" "fsynch" doesn't break > > > that assumption, > > > > > Are we really doing a sync after the pg_log write ? While the sync > > after datablock write seems necessary to guarantee consistency, > > the sync after log write is actually not necessary to guarantee consistency. > > Would it be a first step, to special case the writing to pg_log, as > > to not sync (extra switch to backend) ? This would avoid the syncs > > for read only transactions, since they don't cause data block writes. > > You are right. We don't need a sync after the pg_log write. We need. I agreed with extra switch to backend. Vadim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: