Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 12:36 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> So here my stand is that we need to drop database buffers and remove
> pending sync requests because we are deleting underlying files and if
> we do not do that in some extreme cases then there is no need to drop
> the buffers or remove the pending sync request and the worst
> consequences would be waste of disk space.

Hmm, I guess you're right.

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 7:51 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> - Removed unused structure and macro because we are using the same WAL
> for copying the database using the old method or creating the
> directory and version files for the new method. Do you think we
> should introduce a new WAL for that instead of using the same?

I think it would make sense to have two different WAL records e.g.
XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_WAL_LOG and XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_FILE_COPY. Then it's
easy to see how this could be generalized to other strategies in the
future.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com