Re: Initdb-time block size specification

On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 11:42:30PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
> On 6/30/23 23:11, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > ...
> >
> > I suspect you're going to see more benefits from going to a *lower* setting
> > than a higher one. Some practical issues aside, plenty of storage hardware
> > these days would allow to get rid of FPIs if you go to 4k blocks (although it
> > often requires explicit sysadmin action to reformat the drive into that mode
> > etc). But obviously that's problematic from the "postgres limits" POV.
> >
>
> I wonder what are the conditions/options for disabling FPI. I kinda
> assume it'd apply to new drives with 4k sectors, with properly aligned
> partitions etc. But I haven't seen any particularly clear confirmation
> that's correct.

I don't think we have ever had to study this --- we just request the
write to the operating system, and we either get a successful reply or
we go into WAL recovery to reread the pre-image. We never really care
if the write is atomic, e.g., an 8k write can be done in 2 4kB writes 4
2kB writes --- we don't care --- we only care if they are all done or
not.

For a 4kB write, to say it is not partially written would be to require
the operating system to guarantee that the 4kB write is not split into
smaller writes which might each be atomic because smaller atomic writes
would not help us.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Only you can decide what is important to you.