Re: Freezing is not WAL-logged

From: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Freezing is not WAL-logged
Date: 2006-10-20 08:49:47
Message-ID: 45388DAB.1060608@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>>> I just noticed that freezing a tuple (in vacuumlazy.c) is not
>>> WAL-logged.
>> The theory is that this doesn't matter because the tuple is committed
>> either way ... it's equivalent to a hint-bit update which we don'ton
>> WAL-log either.
>
> Also it'd be hugely expensive to log each freeze operation. The
> alternative would be to log a VACUUM FREEZE, but that has the potential
> to cause enormous recovery runtime.

Freezing isn't very common, and a single WAL record per page would be
enough. I can write the patch.

It does have the potential to increase recovery times, but I don't think
we can just cross our fingers and hope that no crash happens after
freezing some tuples.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message manoj 2006-10-20 08:53:34 BUG #2709: how to start postgresql at startup
Previous Message Shutra 2006-10-20 08:01:10 BUG #2708: Saving '\0' to bpchar by jdbc driver 8.1-407.jdbc3