From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: corrupt pages detected by enabling checksums |
Date: | 2013-04-04 19:59:36 |
Message-ID: | 1365105576.14231.58.camel@jdavis |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres,
Thank you for diagnosing this problem!
On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 16:53 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think the route you quickly sketched is more realistic. That would
> remove all knowledge obout XLOG_HINT from generic code hich is a very
> good thing, I spent like 15minutes yesterday wondering whether the early
> return in there might be the cause of the bug...
I like this approach. It may have some performance impact though,
because there are a couple extra spinlocks taken, and an extra memcpy.
The code looks good to me except that we should be consistent about the
page hole -- XLogCheckBuffer is calculating it, but then we copy the
entire page. I don't think anything can change the size of the page hole
while we have a shared lock on the buffer, so it seems OK to skip the
page hole during the copy.
Another possible approach is to drop the lock on the buffer and
re-acquire it in exclusive mode after we find out we'll need to do
XLogInsert. It means that MarkBufferDirtyHint may end up blocking for
longer, but would avoid the memcpy. I haven't really thought through the
details.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-04-04 20:16:12 | Re: Hash Join cost estimates |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2013-04-04 19:47:09 | Re: puzzling JSON bug |