On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> But having said that, I wonder whether we need a full-page image for
>> a WAL-logged action that is known to involve only setting a single bit
>> and updating LSN. Would omitting the FPI be any more risky than what
>> happens now (ie, the page does get written back to disk at some point,
>> without any image from which it can be rewritten if the write fails...)
> That's pretty much exactly what Heikki proposed 35 minutes ago, and
> you objected 6 minutes later. I still think it might work.
Oh, I see the difference now.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: rickytato rickytato||Date: 2010-11-30 17:27:39|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-11-30 17:25:41|
|Subject: Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three|