pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 14:18:46 -0400
Message-ID: <12915.1522433926@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5ABD9083.5050908@anastigmatix.net>
References: <CAB7nPqQr1D3gjx8CmHYQREidG2eeGHzx2yQ97B3t2L99GE=+kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5A92F0C0.7070706@anastigmatix.net>
	<C0523BD1-485D-48B5-982E-8D63E2D001B7@yesql.se>
	<5AADB130.2020206@anastigmatix.net>
	<4597.1521338981@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<46FFB930-B0F3-400A-85ED-D9948C97FADF@yesql.se>
	<5AAEE00E.9050503@anastigmatix.net>
	<21C25ED8-4ED8-4AD4-B551-3E3987ECB18F@yesql.se>
	<5AAEFF11.3070903@anastigmatix.net>
	<20180326032731.GM24540@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<20180326054354.GB2759@paquier.xyz>
	<5ABAC668.5080203@anastigmatix.net>
	<8c00b26a-d6da-5764-e67e-9c4d8128081a@2ndquadrant.com>
	<5ABD9083.5050908@anastigmatix.net>

Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net> writes:
> On 03/27/18 22:10, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Here you go for one example:
>> https://sourceforge.net/projects/pglesslog/

> In any case, from my study of the commit, it is hard for me to see an issue.
> The code comment says: "mark the header to indicate that WAL records
> beginning in this page have removable backup blocks."

Yeah, that commit just moved a flag from individual WAL records to page
headers, arguing that it was okay to assume that the same flag value
applies to all records on a page.  If there are no records in the page,
it doesn't matter what you think the flag value is.

A potentially stronger complaint is that WAL-reading tools might fail
outright on a page with an invalid header, but I'd say that's a robustness
issue that they'd need to address anyway.  There's never been any
guarantee that the trailing pages of a WAL segment are valid.

			regards, tom lane




view thread (49+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <12915.1522433926@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../12915.1522433926@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/12915.1522433926@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, chap@anastigmatix.net, tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, michael@paquier.xyz, sfrost@snowman.net, daniel@yesql.se, michael.paquier@gmail.com, hlinnaka@iki.fi, robertmhaas@gmail.com, bruce@momjian.us
  Subject: Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
  In-Reply-To: <12915.1522433926@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox