Re: Re: Reduce amount of WAL generated by CREATE INDEX for gist, gin and sp-gist

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Reduce amount of WAL generated by CREATE INDEX for gist, gin and sp-gist
Date: 2019-03-25 07:57:13
Message-ID: 4030cc62-c86d-52c6-dc06-087ed0125244@pgmasters.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/6/19 2:08 PM, Andrey Lepikhov wrote:
> The patchset had a problem with all-zero pages, has appeared at index
> build stage: the generic_log_relation() routine sends all pages into the
> WAL. So lsn field at all-zero page was initialized and the
> PageIsVerified() routine detects it as a bad page.
> The solution may be:
> 1. To improve index build algorithms and eliminate the possibility of
> not used pages appearing.
> 2. To mark each page as 'dirty' right after initialization. In this case
> we will got 'empty' page instead of the all-zeroed.
> 3. Do not write into the WAL all-zero pages.
>
> In the patchset (see attachment) I used approach No.3.
>
> On 04.02.2019 10:04, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:41:48AM +0500, Andrey Lepikhov wrote:
>>> Ok. It is used only for demonstration.
>>
>> The latest patch set needs a rebase, so moved to next CF, waiting on
>> author as this got no reviews.

The patch no longer applies so marked Waiting on Author.

Alexander, Heikki, are either of you planning to review the patch in
this CF?

Regards,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-03-25 08:04:05 Re: Fix handling of unlogged tables in FOR ALL TABLES publications
Previous Message David Steele 2019-03-25 07:51:35 Re: Re: using index or check in ALTER TABLE SET NOT NULL