Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe we should take a different approach to the problem:
> 1. Create new file with an extension to mark that it's not
> yet committed (eg. 1234.notcommitted)
This is pushing the problem into the wrong place, viz the lowest-level
file access rou
Maybe we should take a different approach to the problem:
1. Create new file with an extension to mark that it's not
yet committed (eg. 1234.notcommitted)
2. ...
3. Take CheckpointStartLock
4. Write commit record to WAL, with list of created files.
5. rename created file (1234.notcommitted -> 12
On Thu, 5 May 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
Applied.
Now that I've had a chance to look at it, this patch is thoroughly
broken. Problems observed in a quick review:
1. It doesn't work at all for non-default tablespaces: it will
claim that every file in such a tablespace is stale. T
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Applied.
Now that I've had a chance to look at it, this patch is thoroughly
broken. Problems observed in a quick review:
1. It doesn't work at all for non-default tablespaces: it will
claim that every file in such a tablespace is stale. The fact
that it does that rather
FYI, his patch is in CVS and now only _reports_ unreferenced files, and
it happens on recovery and normal startup.
---
Simon Riggs wrote:
> Heikki,
>
> Good patch.
>
> ...The patch makes no mention of temporary files, whic
Heikki,
Good patch.
...The patch makes no mention of temporary files, which are left there
after a crash.
Temp files are only removed on a normal startup, whereas the patch
invokes removal on both normal startup and crash recovery. That doesn't
make much sense...
Also, temp file deletion happen
Applied.
---
pgman wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>> I feel that crashes that
How embarrasing...
I hope it's all there now.
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Uh, you forgot to add cleanup.h.
---
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
You forgot the attachment?
Damn.
Uh, you forgot to add cleanup.h.
---
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > You forgot the attachment?
>
> Damn. It happens time after time...
>
> - Heikki
Content-Description:
[ A
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I think we do need the patch, at least to find out if there is an issue
> > we don't know about.
>
> My point is that we won't find out anything, because we will have no
> idea if people are noticing the log entries at all, much less telling
> us about
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I think we do need the patch, at least to find out if there is an issue
> we don't know about.
My point is that we won't find out anything, because we will have no
idea if people are noticing the log entries at all, much less telling
us about 'em. Of course if they do tel
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> I feel that crashes that leaves behind stale files are rare.
> >>
> >> Indeed, and getting more so all the time ...
>
> > How so? Hav
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I feel that crashes that leaves behind stale files are rare.
Indeed, and getting more so all the time ...
How so? Have changes bee
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> I feel that crashes that leaves behind stale files are rare.
>>
>> Indeed, and getting more so all the time ...
> How so? Have changes been made in those par
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I feel that crashes that leaves behind stale files are rare.
Indeed, and getting more so all the time ...
How so? Have changes been made in those parts of the code?
which makes me question the value of doing anythin
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
You forgot the attachment?
Damn. It happens time after time...
- HeikkiIndex: doc/src/sgml/maintenance.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/maintenance.sgml,v
retrieving rev
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I feel that crashes that leaves behind stale files are rare.
Indeed, and getting more so all the time ... which makes me question
the value of doing anything about this at all.
regards, tom lane
---(
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
...
I guess I am happy with just reporting during startup like the patch
does now.
Ok. I'll fix the design issues Tom addressed earlier, add documentation, and
resubmit.
Here you go.
The new functionality is n
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
...
I think though that we ought to first consider the question of whether
we *want* this functionality. On reflection I'm fairly nervous about
the idea of actually deleting anything during startup --- seems like a
good recipe for turning s
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> xlog.c is a fairly random place to put that functionality. Didn't it
> >> strike any warning bells for you when you had to add so many new
> >> #includes? I'm not entirely sure where this
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> xlog.c is a fairly random place to put that functionality. Didn't it
>> strike any warning bells for you when you had to add so many new
>> #includes? I'm not entirely sure where this should go, but not there.
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Here's a patch for the TODO item "Remove unreferenced table files created by
transactions
that were in-progress when the server terminated abruptly."
xlog.c is a fairly random place to put that functionality. Didn'
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's a patch for the TODO item "Remove unreferenced table files created by
> transactions
> that were in-progress when the server terminated abruptly."
xlog.c is a fairly random place to put that functionality. Didn't it
strike any warning bell
Here's a patch for the TODO item "Remove unreferenced table files created by transactions
that were in-progress when the server terminated abruptly."
It adds a new function, CleanupStaleRelFiles, that scans through the data
directory and removes all table files that are not mentioned in pg_class
24 matches
Mail list logo
