Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So I'm back to proposing that we just apply FPI-free WAL records
unconditionally, without regard to the LSN. This could potentially
corrupt the page, of course.
Yes. So you're still assuming that there will be a later FPI-containing
WAL record to fix
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So I'm back to proposing that we just apply FPI-free WAL records
unconditionally, without regard to the LSN. This could potentially
corrupt the page, of course.
Yes. So you're
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
What happens if we (a) keep the current rule after reaching
consistency and (b) apply any such updates *unconditionally* - that
is, without reference to the LSN - prior to reaching consistency?
Under that rule, if we
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
3. Page LSN WAL location: do NOT apply field update or change LSN.
I don't think this works. There could be multiple writes to a page for
different records before the crash occurs. The LSN could be far in the
future and yet
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
What happens if we (a) keep the current rule after reaching
consistency and (b) apply any such updates *unconditionally* - that
is, without
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I was thinking about full-page writes again tonight. I'm still
wondering about the feasibility of getting rid of full-page writes for
certain operations. We can do this, I think, in any case where we can
convince ourselves that if the original
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I was thinking about full-page writes again tonight. I'm still
wondering about the feasibility of getting rid of full-page writes for
certain operations. We can do this, I think, in
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Say what? A heap deletion compacts the page --- it will certainly fail
badly on torn-page.
What do you mean by compacts the page? I would interpret that to
mean reclaims the space
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Say what? A heap deletion compacts the page --- it will certainly fail
badly on torn-page.
What do you mean by
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Any substantive comments, besides the obvious this is not 9.1 material?
Now that I've absorbed a bit more caffeine, let's see if I can think
straight this time.
General principle you want to assert: any WAL entry that merely results
in setting a
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Any substantive comments, besides the obvious this is not 9.1 material?
Now that I've absorbed a bit more caffeine, let's see if I can think
straight this time.
General principle
I was thinking about full-page writes again tonight. I'm still
wondering about the feasibility of getting rid of full-page writes for
certain operations. We can do this, I think, in any case where we can
convince ourselves that if the original operation, or a redo of the
original operation,
12 matches
Mail list logo
