| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: race condition when writing pg_control |
| Date: | 2024-05-16 19:01:31 |
| Message-ID: | 2138498.1715886091@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2024-05-16 14:50:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The intention was certainly always that it be atomic. If it isn't
>> we have got *big* trouble.
> We unfortunately do *know* that on several systems e.g. basebackup can read a
> partially written control file, while the control file is being
> updated.
Yeah, but can't we just retry that if we get a bad checksum?
What had better be atomic is the write to disk. Systems that can't
manage POSIX semantics for concurrent reads and writes are annoying,
but not fatal ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-05-16 19:07:44 | Re: race condition when writing pg_control |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-05-16 19:00:36 | Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM |