From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 00:32:16 +0200
Message-ID: <20150703223216.GO3291@awork2.anarazel.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150703172605.GM3291@awork2.anarazel.de>
References: <20150702222102.GG30708@awork2.anarazel.de>
<20150703052048.GA20285@svana.org>
<CAHGQGwEXta1tMF6o-FcDcjMgCF=jnZLj3v3EoePvsEN4aexJnA@mail.gmail.com>
<20150703060137.GB20285@svana.org>
<CAHGQGwFtOMv5h8eKX6zf+9_0UxpcTsyH9xAnyv6KdGH4BonLiw@mail.gmail.com>
<28320.1435935120@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAHGQGwGzxAyKLUm+z2n43-ee6u976jLmQAz=pPBVzSueD3CAig@mail.gmail.com>
<20150703164931.GI3291@awork2.anarazel.de>
<20150703170229.GJ3291@awork2.anarazel.de>
<20150703172605.GM3291@awork2.anarazel.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 2015-07-03 19:26:05 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-07-03 19:02:29 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Maybe I'm just daft right now (35C outside, 32 inside, so ...), but I'm
> > right now missing how the whole "skip wal logging if relation has just
> > been truncated" optimization can ever actually be crashsafe unless we
> > use a new relfilenode (which we don't!).
>
> We actually used to use a different relfilenode, but optimized that
> away: cab9a0656c36739f59277b34fea8ab9438395869
>
> commit cab9a0656c36739f59277b34fea8ab9438395869
> Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> Date: Sun Aug 23 19:23:41 2009 +0000
>
> Make TRUNCATE do truncate-in-place when processing a relation that was created
> or previously truncated in the current (sub)transaction. This is safe since
> if the (sub)transaction later rolls back, we'd just discard the rel's current
> physical file anyway. This avoids unreasonable growth in the number of
> transient files when a relation is repeatedly truncated. Per a performance
> gripe a couple weeks ago from Todd Cook.
>
> to me the reasoning here looks flawed.
It looks to me we need to re-neg on this a bit. I think we can still be
more efficient than the general codepath: We can drop the old
relfilenode immediately. But pg_class.relfilenode has to differ from the
old after the truncation.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
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: andres@anarazel.de, masao.fujii@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, kleptog@svana.org
Subject: Re: WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
In-Reply-To: <20150703223216.GO3291@awork2.anarazel.de>
* 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