| From: | Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm. |
| Date: | 2017-03-13 13:20:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAD__Oug=62CYZRzVVXUJVCpVy_q=k+iE3HaOdTvovi+g7JnMZw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> - The error handling loop around load_block() suggests that you're
>> expecting some reads to fail, which I guess is because you could be
>> trying to read blocks from a relation that's been rewritten under a
>> different relfilenode, or partially or entirely truncated. But I
>> don't think it's very reasonable to just let ReadBufferWhatever() spew
>> error messages into the log and hope users don't panic. People will
>> expect an automatic prewarm solution to handle any such cases quietly,
>> not bleat loudly in the log. I suspect that this error-trapping code
>> isn't entirely correct, but there's not much point in fixing it; what
>> we really need to do is get rid of it (somehow).
>
> [Need Reelook] -- Debug and check if block load fails what will happen.
Oops Sorry, this was for self-reference. It is fixed now
--
Thanks and Regards
Mithun C Y
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-03-13 14:07:55 | Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design |
| Previous Message | Mithun Cy | 2017-03-13 13:15:00 | Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm. |