Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Asim Praveen <apraveen(at)pivotal(dot)io>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)
Date: 2018-11-08 18:07:29
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYiiuA=JFCp+bbjkQR_hhzB2a8XEJ51pc-7vkeY8fsLRQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 9:41 PM Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> My plan is do a round of testing and review of this stuff next week
> once the dust is settled on the current minor releases (including
> fixing a few typos I just spotted and some word-smithing). All going
> well, I will then push the resulting patches to master and all
> supported stable branches, unless other reviews or objections appear.
> At some point not too far down the track I hope to be ready to
> consider committing that other patch that will completely change all
> of this code in the master branch, but in any case Craig's patch will
> get almost a full minor release cycle to sit in the stable branches
> before release.

I did a read-through of these patches.

+ new_requests = entry->requests[forknum];
+ entry->requests[forknum] =
+ bms_join(new_requests, requests);

What happens if bms_join fails, too?

+ recover from the WAL after any failure is reported, preferrably

preferably.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-11-08 19:05:59 Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes
Previous Message Robert Haas 2018-11-08 17:57:55 Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent?