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

Re: Block-level CRC checks

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Brian Hurt <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Date: 2008-10-02 17:07:31
Message-ID: 200810021707.m92H7Vx05677@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> PG doesn't care because during hint-bits aren't logged and during
> normal WAL replay, the old page will be pulled from the WAL.  I
> believe what Tom is referring to is that the buffer PG sends to
> write() can still be modified by way of SetHintBits between the time
> smgrwrite is called and the time the actual write takes place, which
> is why we can't rely on a checksum of the buffer pointer passed to
> smgrwrite and friends.
> 
> If we're double-buffering the write, I don't see where we could be
> introducing a torn-page, as we'd actually be writing a copied version
> of the buffer.  Will look into this.

The torn page is during kernel write to disk, I assume, so it is still
possible.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ron MayerDate: 2008-10-02 17:11:10
Subject: Re: Interval output bug in HAVE_INT64_TIMESTAMP
Previous:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2008-10-02 16:59:45
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

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