| From: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | "'Zeugswetter Andreas SB'" <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: heap page corruption not easy |
| Date: | 2000-12-19 00:58:03 |
| Message-ID: | 3A3EB29B.AAAD7E3D@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Mikheev, Vadim" wrote:
>
> > The point is, that the heap page is only modified in places that were
> > previously empty (except header). All previous row data stays exactly
> > in the same place. Thus if a page is only partly written
> > (any order of page segments) only a new row is affected.
>
> Exception: PageRepairFragmentation() and PageIndexTupleDelete() are
> called during vacuum - they change layout of tuples.
>
Is it guaranteed that the result of PageRepairFragmentation()
has already been written to disk when tuple movement is logged ?
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ryan Kirkpatrick | 2000-12-19 01:59:34 | Re: 7.1 features list |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-12-19 00:25:38 | Re: Who is a maintainer of GiST code ? |