Re: The ability of postgres to determine loss of files of the main fork

From: Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)tigerdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Frits Hoogland <frits(dot)hoogland(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: The ability of postgres to determine loss of files of the main fork
Date: 2025-10-01 12:15:52
Message-ID: 68dd1b79.170a0220.3c4175.198f@mx.google.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 02:05:53PM +0200, Jakub Wartak wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2025 at 1:46 PM Aleksander Alekseev
> <aleksander(at)tigerdata(dot)com> wrote:
> > > IMHO all files should be opened at least on startup to check
> > > integrity,

I would say s/startup/crash recovery/, if any.

> > That might be a lot of files to open.
>
> I was afraid of that, but let's say modern high-end is 200TB big DB,
> that's like 200*1024 1GB files, but I'm getting such time(1) timings
> for 204k files on ext4:
>
> $ time ./createfiles # real 0m2.157s, it's
> open(O_CREAT)+close()
> $ time ls -l many_files_dir/ > /dev/null # real 0m0.734s
> $ time ./openfiles # real 0m0.297s , for
> already existing ones (hot)
> $ time ./openfiles # real 0m1.456s , for
> already existing ones (cold, echo 3 > drop_caches sysctl)
>
> Not bad in my book as a one time activity. It could pose a problem
> potentially with some high latency open() calls, maybe NFS or
> something remote I guess.

Yeah, did you try on SAN as well? I am doubtful that will be performant.

Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) 2025-10-01 12:17:50 RE: Patch for migration of the pg_commit_ts directory
Previous Message Frits Hoogland 2025-10-01 12:15:06 Re: The ability of postgres to determine loss of files of the main fork