| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, vadim4o(at)email(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: WAL and commit_delay |
| Date: | 2001-02-17 20:45:30 |
| Message-ID: | 200102172045.PAA02841@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Right now the WAL preallocation code (XLogFileInit) is not good enough
> because it does lseek to the 16MB position and then writes 1 byte there.
> On an implementation that supports holes in files (which is most Unixen)
> that doesn't cause physical allocation of the intervening space. We'd
> have to actually write zeroes into all 16MB to ensure the space is
> allocated ... but that's just a couple more lines of code.
Are OS's smart enough to not allocate zero-written blocks? Do we need
to write non-zeros?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2001-02-17 20:48:13 | Re: WAL and commit_delay |
| Previous Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2001-02-17 20:06:00 | Re: Performance lossage in checkpoint dumping |