Re: HOT patch - version 11

From: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: HOT patch - version 11
Date: 2007-08-07 18:01:44
Message-ID: 2e78013d0708071101g4aa0eb19we23807442098bddb@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On 8/2/07, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> . It would also be better if we didn't emit a
> > separate WAL record for defraging a page, if we also prune it at the
> > same time. I'm not that worried about WAL usage in general, but that
> > seems simple enough to fix.
>
>
>
> Ah I see. I shall fix that.
>

When I started making this change, I realized that we need the
second WAL record because if the block is backed up in pruning
WAL write, we may never call PageRepairFragmentation during
the redo phase. Of course, we can fix that by making
heap_xlog_clean always repair page fragmentation irrespective
of whether the block was backed up, but that doesn't seem like
a good solution.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-08-07 18:01:45 HOT patch, missing things
Previous Message Decibel! 2007-08-07 18:00:37 Re: HOT patch - version 13

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-08-07 18:11:03 Re: further WIP for COPYable logs
Previous Message Pavan Deolasee 2007-08-07 12:56:48 HOT patch - version 13