Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Updating FSM on recovery

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updating FSM on recovery
Date: 2008-10-29 12:36:54
Message-ID: 11303.1225283814@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> The FSM would be perfectly happy to just initialize torn or otherwise 
> damaged pages, so I think we should add yet another mode to ReadBuffer() 
> to allow that. We could also treat read() errors as merely warnings in 
> that mode, effectively the same as with zero_damaged_pages=on.

> The ReadBuffer() interface is already pretty complex, with all the 
> different variants. We should probably keep the good old ReadBuffer() 
> the same, for the sake of simplicity in the callers, but try to reduce 
> the number of other variatns.

Indeed.  Did you see the discussion about the similarly-too-complex
heap_insert API a couple days ago in connection with bulk-write
scenarios?  The conclusion there was to try to shift stuff into a
bitmask options argument, in hopes that future additions might not
require touching every caller.  Can we do it similarly here?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-29 12:44:07
Subject: Re: some problem with casting unknown to smallint
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2008-10-29 12:31:46
Subject: Re: some problem with casting unknown to smallint

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group