Re: Gist Recovery testing

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: Raw Message | Whole Thread | 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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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