From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Writing WAL for relcache invalidation:pg_internal.init |
Date: | 2006-11-02 14:55:36 |
Message-ID: | 16213.1162479336@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 12:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think this works.
> Surely you are pointing out a bug, no?
> If a backend did crash, the init file would be wrong and we'd get
> exactly the same wrong relfilenode errors we got after that PITR.
Yeah, which is the same bug we've got now. They're both WAL-replay-
doesn't-fix-the-init-file cases.
> The issue must surely be that the patch isn't wrong per se, just that
> RelationCacheInitFileInvalidate is called too late and that requires an
> additional fix.
No. In the non-crash situation there is sufficient interlocking to
avoid a problem, and I feel no desire to redesign that mechanism.
Trying to do it before commit would create its own issues, anyway:
someone could install a new init file before you finish committing.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-02 14:59:54 | Re: [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcache invalidation:pg_internal.init |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-11-02 14:44:24 | Re: [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcacheinvalidation:pg_internal.init |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-02 14:59:54 | Re: [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcache invalidation:pg_internal.init |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-11-02 14:44:24 | Re: [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcacheinvalidation:pg_internal.init |