Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions
Date: 2016-02-04 09:02:32
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Not wrong, and this leads to the following:
> void rename_safe(const char *old, const char *new, bool isdir, int elevel);
> Controlling elevel is necessary per the multiple code paths that would
> use it. Some use ERROR, most of them FATAL, and a bit of WARNING. Does
> that look fine?

After really coding it, I finished with the following thing:
+rename_safe(const char *old, const char *new)

There is no need to extend that for directories, well we could of
course but all the renames happen on files so I see no need to make
that more complicated. More refactoring of the other rename() calls
could be done as well by extending rename_safe() with a flag to fsync
the data within a critical section, particularly for the replication
slot code. I have let that out to not complicate more the patch.

Attachment: xlog-fsync-v4.patch
Description: text/x-diff (16.6 KB)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2016-02-04 09:06:47
Subject: Re: [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql
Previous:From: Etsuro FujitaDate: 2016-02-04 09:00:03
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw join pushdown (was Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group