From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes |
Date: | 2017-03-15 14:55:06 |
Message-ID: | 20170315145506.GT9812@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > FWIW, I'm not certain that Stephen is correct to claim that we have
> > some concrete problem with sparse files. We certainly don't *depend*
> > on sparse storage anyplace else, nor write data in a way that would be
> > likely to trigger it; but I'm not aware that we need to work hard to
> > avoid it.
>
> That theory seems inconsistent with how mdextend() works. My
> understanding is that we zero-fill the new blocks before populating
> them with actual data precisely to avoid running out of disk space due
> to deferred allocation at the OS level. If we don't care about
> failures due to deferred allocation at the OS level, we can rip that
> logic out and improve the performance of relation extension
> considerably. If we do care about failures due to deferred
> allocation, then leaving holes in the file is a bad idea.
That is a fantastic point.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-15 14:57:15 | Re: [PATCH] Suppress Clang 3.9 warnings |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-15 14:53:50 | Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes |