From: | Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PoC] configurable out of disk space elog level |
Date: | 2022-11-17 11:40:02 |
Message-ID: | CACG=ezaq_nTA3cmo8frhqOdq1P+gP6vk0RYCP4wz-L3=s7hpMw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 20:41, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
> You can't do catalog access below the bufmgr.c layer. It could lead to all
> kinds of nastiness, including potentially recursing back to md.c. Even
> leaving
>
Yep, this is my biggest concern. It turns out, that the way to make such a
feature is to use just GUC for all tablespaces or
forward elevel "from above".
> that aside, we can't do catalog accesses in all kinds of environments that
> this currently is active in - most importantly it's affecting the startup
> process. We don't do catalog accesses in the startup process, and even if
> we
> were to do so, we couldn't unconditionally because the catalog might not
> even
> be consistent at this point (nor is it guaranteed that the wal_level even
> allows to access catalogs during recovery).
>
Yep, that is why I do use in get_tablespace_elevel:
+ /*
+ * Use GUC level only in normal mode.
+ */
+ if (!IsNormalProcessingMode())
+ return ERROR;
Anyway, I appreciate the opinion, thank you!
--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thom Brown | 2022-11-17 12:04:46 | Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2022-11-17 11:39:49 | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 |