Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2

From: Ants Aasma <ants(dot)aasma(at)eesti(dot)ee>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca, stark(at)mit(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Date: 2011-12-29 23:12:44
Message-ID: CA+CSw_sKa7cOa3JhGpro3secET0RZfDFdz2N1JMsPa8Lzs=NZg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> positives.  To get this right for a checksum in the page header,
> double-write would need to be used for all cases where
> full_page_writes now are used (i.e., the first write of a page after
> a checkpoint), and for all unlogged writes (e.g., hint-bit-only
> writes).  There would be no correctness problem for always using
> double-write, but it would be unnecessary overhead for other page
> writes, which I think we can avoid.

Unless I'm missing something, double-writes are needed for all writes,
not only the first page after a checkpoint. Consider this sequence of
events:

1. Checkpoint
2. Double-write of page A (DW buffer write, sync, heap write)
3. Sync of heap, releasing DW buffer for new writes.
... some time goes by
4. Regular write of page A
5. OS writes one part of page A
6. Crash!

Now recovery comes along, page A is broken in the heap with no
double-write buffer backup nor anything to recover it by in the WAL.

--
Ants Aasma

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-12-29 23:13:31 Re: SEGFAULT on SELECT * FROM view
Previous Message Jean-Yves F. Barbier 2011-12-29 23:10:01 index refuses to build