Re: [PATCH] Lazy xid assingment V2
От | August Zajonc |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Lazy xid assingment V2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46DAD08E.8000008@augustz.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Lazy xid assingment V2 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Lazy xid assingment V2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > There's also the plan B of scanning pg_class to decide which relfilenode > values are legit. IIRC Bruce did up a patch for this about a year ago, > which I vetoed because I was afraid of the consequences if it removed > data that someone really needed. Someone just mentioned doing the same > thing but pushing the unreferenced files into a "trash" directory > instead of actually deleting them. While that answers the > risk-of-data-loss objection, I'm not sure it does much for the goal of > avoiding useless space consumption: how many DBAs will faithfully > examine and clean out that trash directory? > > For the admin who for some reason deletes critical input data before seeing a COMMIT return from postgresql they can probably keep the files. The thing is, the leak occurs in situation where a COMMIT hasn't returned to the user, so we are trying to guarantee no data-loss even when the user doesn't see a successful commit? That's a tall order obviously and hopefully people design their apps to attend to transaction success / failure. Plan B certainly won't take more space, and is probably the easiest to cleanup.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: