| From: | "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and |
| Date: | 2005-12-23 00:53:04 |
| Message-ID: | dofhnu$28o3$1@news.hub.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote
> "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
>> BEGIN TRANSACTION WITHOUT XLOG; /* forbidden vacuum, PITR etc */
>
>> So during this peroid, if any transaction failed, the only consequence is
>> add invisible garbage data.
>
> No, the likely consequence is irretrievable corruption of any table or
> index page touched by the transaction.
>
I guess I know (at least part) of what you mean. This is because we rely on
replay all the xlog no matter it belongs to a committed transaction or not.
Why? Because a failed transaction is not totally useless since later
transaction may reply on some physical thing it creates - for example, a new
page and its links of a btree. So for heap, there is(95% sure) no such
problem. Our heap redo algorithm can automatically add empty pages to a
heap. For index, there are problems, but I suspect they are solvable by not
bypassing these records ... if this is not totally-nonstarter, I will
investigate details of how to do it.
Regards,
Qingqing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-23 01:21:54 | Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Client-side password encryption |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-12-23 00:38:28 | Re: Disparity in search_path SHOW and SET |