Re: Error with index on unlogged table

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Error with index on unlogged table
Date: 2015-12-09 07:41:40
Message-ID: 20151209074140.GH28762@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-12-09 16:30:47 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > I'm kinda wondering if it wouldn't have been better to go through shared
> > buffers in ResetUnloggedRelationsInDbspaceDir() instead of using
> > copy_file().
>
> For deployment with large shared_buffers settings, wouldn't that be
> actually more costly than the current way of doing? We would need to
> go through all the buffers at least once and look for the INIT_FORKNUM
> present to flush them.

We could just check the file sizes on disk, and the check for the
contents of all the pages for each file.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2015-12-09 07:52:30 Re: Remaining 9.5 open items
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-12-09 07:30:47 Re: Error with index on unlogged table