Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date: 2022-03-31 16:25:18
Message-ID: 20220331162518.ytp52htuyn5a7qqe@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2022-03-31 10:05:10 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 3:52 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > 0001 is changing the strategy to file copy during initdb and 0002
> > patch adds the test cases for both these cases.
>
> IMHO, 0001 looks fine, except for needing some adjustments to the wording.

Agreed.

> I'm less sure about 0002. It's testing the stuff Andres mentioned, but
> I'm not sure how good the tests are.

I came to a similar conclusion. It's still better than nothing, but it's just
a small bit of additional effort to do some basic testing that e.g. the move
actually worked...

> Andres, thoughts? Do you want me to polish and commit 0001?

Yes please!

FWIW, once the freeze is done I'm planning to set up scripting to see which
parts of the code we whacked around don't have test coverage...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-03-31 16:25:38 Re: pgsql: Add 'basebackup_to_shell' contrib module.
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-03-31 16:21:59 Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints