Re: remove more archiving overhead

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: remove more archiving overhead
Date: 2022-04-08 16:07:56
Message-ID: 20220408160756.GA1409034@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 10:20:27AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 6:23 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:55:53AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> > Yes. I found that a crash at an unfortunate moment can produce multiple
>> > links to the same file in pg_wal, which seemed bad independent of archival.
>> > By fixing that (i.e., switching from durable_rename_excl() to
>> > durable_rename()), we not only avoid this problem, but we also avoid trying
>> > to archive a file the server is concurrently writing. Then, after a crash,
>> > the WAL file to archive should either not exist (which is handled by the
>> > archiver) or contain the same contents as any preexisting archives.
>> I moved the fix for this to a new thread [0] since I think it should be
>> back-patched. I've attached a new patch that only contains the part
>> related to reducing archiving overhead.
> While we're now after the feature freeze and thus this will need to
> wait for v16, it looks like a reasonable change to me.

Dang, just missed it. Thanks for taking a look.

Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services:

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-04-08 16:09:34 Re: Size of pg_rewrite (Was: Report checkpoint progress with pg_stat_progress_checkpoint)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-04-08 16:01:22 Re: Temporary file access API