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

Re: XLogInsert

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: XLogInsert
Date: 2009-08-19 16:49:07
Message-ID: 24638.1250700547@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> If I read the code correctly, the only thing that is irrevocable is
> that it writes into
> rdt->next, and if it saved an old copy of rdt first, then it could
> revoke the changes just
> by doing rdt_old->next=NULL.  If that were done, then I think this
> code could be
> moved out of the section holding the WALInsertLock.

Hmm, I recall that the changes are ... or were ... more complex.
The tricky case I think is where we have to go back and redo the
block-backup decisions after discovering that the checkpoint REDO
pointer has just moved.

If you can get the work out of the WALInsertLock section for just a
few more instructions, it would definitely be worth doing.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

  • XLogInsert at 2009-08-19 16:14:08 from Jeff Janes

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-08-19 17:07:31
Subject: Re: alpha1 bundled -- please verify
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2009-08-19 16:33:34
Subject: Re: alpha1 bundled -- please verify

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