Re: checkpoint reliability

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: checkpoint reliability
Date: 2001-12-19 04:33:49
Message-ID: 3C2018AD.DF77D0CE@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I was wondering, when we start to reuse a WAL file, do we know that all
> > dirty buffers modified in that WAL file have been flushed to disk?
>
> Yes. At least two checkpoints ago, in fact.

Isn't the following what Bruce asked ?

/*
* mdsync() -- Sync storage.
*
*/
int
mdsync()
{
sync();
if (IsUnderPostmaster)
sleep(2);
sync();
return SM_SUCCESS;
}

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-12-19 04:34:36 Re: checkpoint reliability
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2001-12-19 04:29:24 Re: problems with table corruption continued