| From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Gist Recovery testing |
| Date: | 2005-06-15 18:08:32 |
| Message-ID: | 42B06EA0.40808@kaltenbrunner.cc |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
>> btree manages to avoid calling the index support functions during WAL
>> restore --- can't you do the same? Perhaps you need to be including
>> more information in the initial xlog records, so that the cleanup step
>> has everything it needs. Or resort to brute-force search (which is more
>> or less what btree does). I don't think this operation needs to be very
>> efficient, since it's a corner case that should only seldom be invoked.
>
>
> I've just commited WALogging for GiST. It works for online backup
> (normal recovery) and mostly after crash, but in this case it can't
> restore inclompleted inserts although it can detected and say to log
> thet it's needed to reindex GiST index.
FYI: we now have at least 4 machines(otter,kingfisher,lionfish,corgi) on
the buildfarm crashing during testing of GIST-related things in contrib.
Any chance this could be related to this change ?
Stefan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-06-15 18:18:50 | Re: max_fsm_pages >800k ... ? |
| Previous Message | John Hansen | 2005-06-15 18:04:25 | Re: LGPL |