On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Checksums merely detect a problem, whereas FPWs correct a problem if
> it happens, but only in crash situations.
>
> So this does nothing to remove the need for FPWs, though checksum
> detection could be used for double write buffers also.
Thi
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> On its own that sounds dangerous, but its not. When we need to confirm
>> the prev link we already know what we expect it to be, so CRC-ing it
>> is overkill. That isn't true of any other part of the WAL record, so
>> the prev link is the only th
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I've looked at that, and it was discussed a bit previously. It's more
> complex because it requires that we keep track of (or calculate) where we
> are on the line,
You might try a compromise, just spit out all the columns on one line
*unle
On Saturday, December 24, 2011 05:01:02 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Saturday, December 24, 2011 03:46:16 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Simon Riggs writes:
> >> > After the various recent discussions on list, I present what I believe
> >> > to be
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> Not an expert here, but after reading through the patch quickly, I
> don't see anything that changes the torn-page problem though, right?
>
> Hint bits aren't wal-logged, and FPW isn't forced on the hint-bit-only
> dirty, right?
Checksums m
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Saturday, December 24, 2011 03:46:16 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Simon Riggs writes:
>> > After the various recent discussions on list, I present what I believe
>> > to be a working patch implementing 16-but checksums on all buffer
>> > pages.
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
>> After the various recent discussions on list, I present what I believe
>> to be a working patch implementing 16-but checksums on all buffer
>> pages.
>
> I think locking around hint-bit-setting is likely to be unworkable fr
On Saturday, December 24, 2011 03:46:16 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > After the various recent discussions on list, I present what I believe
> > to be a working patch implementing 16-but checksums on all buffer
> > pages.
>
> I think locking around hint-bit-setting is likely to be
Simon Riggs writes:
> After the various recent discussions on list, I present what I believe
> to be a working patch implementing 16-but checksums on all buffer
> pages.
I think locking around hint-bit-setting is likely to be unworkable from
a performance standpoint. I also wonder whether it mig
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Well, because it doesn't operate on strings.
>
> I argued when we added string_agg that it ought to be called
> concat_agg, or something like that, but I got shouted down. So now
> here we are.
+1. Using the input type names to name the fun
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Kevin Grittner
> wrote:
>
>> Simon, does it sound like I understand your proposal?
>
> Yes, thanks for restating.
I've implemented that proposal, posting patch on a separate thread.
--
Simon Riggs
After the various recent discussions on list, I present what I believe
to be a working patch implementing 16-but checksums on all buffer
pages.
page_checksums = on | off (default)
There are no required block changes; checksums are optional and some
blocks may have a checksum, others not. This mea
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> You mentioned "latency" so this morning I ran pgbench with -l and
> graphed the output. There are latency spikes every few seconds. I'm
> attaching the overall graph as well as the graph of the last 100
> seconds, where the spikes are easier
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Sorry. Last minute changes, didn't retest properly.. Here's another attempt.
When I tested the patch, initdb failed:
$ initdb -D data
initializing dependencies ... PANIC: could not locate a valid checkpoint record
Regards,
--
14 matches
Mail list logo
