| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Prabhat Sahu <prabhat(dot)sahu(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Oleg Golovanov <rentech(at)mail(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Hash take II |
| Date: | 2017-12-08 00:00:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20171208000003.xlcfhvkdrr3gzu2x@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-12-08 12:07:04 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> I suppose if we wanted to make this type of problem go away, but still
> keep files for forensic purposes, we could introduce a "restart
> number", and stick it into the top level temporary directory's name.
> That way you'd never be able to collide with files created before a
> crash-restart, and we could add O_EXCL so it'd become an error to try
> to create the same filename again.
I'm deeply unconvinced by the "forensic" argument to not do temp file
cleanup after crash restarts. That causes problems like the one we're
debating upthread in the first place, so I'm wholly unconvinced we
should add to that further by adding another layer of complexity.
My personal opinion is that we should just do temp file cleanup after
crash restarts, and document restart_after_crash = false as the solution
for investigating crashes. I don't want to hold up this patch with a
discussion of that however, so I'm ok with your fix.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-12-08 00:33:11 | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2017-12-07 23:47:51 | Re: [HACKERS] Transaction control in procedures |