Re: Re: GiST optimizing memmoves in gistplacetopage for fixed-size updates [PoC]

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: amborodin(at)acm(dot)org
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Sergey Mirvoda <sergey(at)mirvoda(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Re: GiST optimizing memmoves in gistplacetopage for fixed-size updates [PoC]
Date: 2016-07-08 05:13:38
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTpyxxVgtbGtDcMFV07pEqn6h+iBNdPbHSsLA-WSOdjsQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Andrew Borodin <borodin(at)octonica(dot)com> wrote:

(Please top-post on threads, this is annoying)

> One more thing came to my mind:
> WAL records done by the GiST before patch will corrupt GiST after
> patch if replayed.
> Is it a problem? May be it's prevented on some higher level?

If a feature changes the shape of WAL records, XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC is
bumped to prevent any problems.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2016-07-08 06:28:28 Re: copyParamList
Previous Message Andrew Borodin 2016-07-08 05:00:28 Re: Re: GiST optimizing memmoves in gistplacetopage for fixed-size updates [PoC]