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

checkpoint reliability

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: checkpoint reliability
Date: 2001-12-19 03:03:39
Message-ID: 200112190303.fBJ33dr11575@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I was wondering, when we start to reuse a WAL file, do we know that all
dirty buffers modified in that WAL file have been flushed to disk?  Do
we fsync() dirty buffers at time of checkpoint, and do we also make sure
that buffers we wrote to disk and later reused before the checkpoint
also made it to disk?

My point is that writing it to the kernel doesn't guarantee it made it
to disk.

I see the WAL records being fsync'ed in xlog.c but I don't see the
buffer pages being fsynced.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2001-12-19 03:10:46
Subject: Re: FreeBSD/alpha
Previous:From: Doug McNaughtDate: 2001-12-19 02:55:37
Subject: Re: Concerns about this release

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