Re: I/O on select count(*)
| От | Tom Lane | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: I/O on select count(*) | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4758.1210863178@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: I/O on select count(*) (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>) | 
| Список | pgsql-performance | 
Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org> writes:
> Hmm. That problem is what WAL full-page-writes is meant to handle, isn't
> it? So basically, if you're telling people that WAL full-page-writes is
> safer than partial WAL, because it avoids updating pages in-place, then
> you shouldn't be updating pages in-place for the hint bits either. You
> can't win!
This argument ignores the nature of the data change.  With a hint-bit
update, no data is being shuffled around, so there is no danger from a
partial page write.
A disk that leaves an individual sector corrupt would be a problem,
but I don't think that's a huge risk.  Keep in mind that disks aren't
designed to just stop dead when power dies --- they are made to be able
to park their heads before the juice is entirely gone.  I think it's
reasonable to assume they'll finish writing the sector in progress
before they start parking.
            regards, tom lane
		
	В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: