From: | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Direct I/O |
Date: | 2023-04-12 16:38:06 |
Message-ID: | 873555rr81.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 2023-04-12 We 10:23, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>>
>>> On 2023-04-12 We 01:48, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 3:04 PM Thomas Munro<thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 2:56 PM Christoph Berg<myon(at)debian(dot)org> wrote:
>>>>>> I'm hitting a panic in t_004_io_direct. The build is running on
>>>>>> overlayfs on tmpfs/ext4 (upper/lower) which is probably a weird
>>>>>> combination but has worked well for building everything over the last
>>>>>> decade. On Debian unstable:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PANIC: could not open file "pg_wal/000000010000000000000001": Invalid argument
>>>>> ... I have a new idea: perhaps it is possible to try
>>>>> to open a file with O_DIRECT from perl, and if it fails like that,
>>>>> skip the test. Looking into that now.
>>>> I think I have that working OK. Any Perl hackers want to comment on
>>>> my use of IO::File (copied from examples on the internet that showed
>>>> how to use O_DIRECT)? I am not much of a perl hacker but according to
>>>> my package manager, IO/File.pm came with perl itself. And the Fcntl
>>>> eval trick that I copied from File::stat, and the perl-critic
>>>> suppression that requires?
>>>
>>> I think you can probably replace a lot of the magic here by simply saying
>>>
>>>
>>> if (Fcntl->can("O_DIRECT")) ...
>> Fcntl->can() is true for all constants that Fcntl knows about, whether
>> or not they are defined for your OS. `defined &O_DIRECT` is the simplest
>> check, see my other reply to Thomas.
>>
>>
>
> My understanding was that Fcntl only exported constants known to the
> OS. That's certainly what its docco suggests, e.g.:
>
> By default your system's F_* and O_* constants (eg, F_DUPFD and
> O_CREAT)
> and the FD_CLOEXEC constant are exported into your namespace.
It's a bit more magical than that (this is Perl after all). They are
all exported (which implicitly creates stubs visible to `->can()`,
similarly to forward declarations like `sub O_FOO;`), but only the
defined ones (`#ifdef O_FOO` is true) are defined (`defined &O_FOO` is
true). The rest fall through to an AUTOLOAD¹ function that throws an
exception for undefined ones.
Here's an example (Fcntl knows O_RAW, but Linux does not define it):
$ perl -E '
use strict; use Fcntl;
say "can", main->can("O_RAW") ? "" : "not";
say defined &O_RAW ? "" : "not ", "defined";
say O_RAW;'
can
not defined
Your vendor has not defined Fcntl macro O_RAW, used at -e line 4
While O_DIRECT is defined:
$ perl -E '
use strict; use Fcntl;
say "can", main->can("O_DIRECT") ? "" : "not";
say defined &O_DIRECT ? "" : "not ", "defined";
say O_DIRECT;'
can
defined
16384
And O_FOO is unknown to Fcntl (the parens on `O_FOO()q are to make it
not a bareword, which would be a compile error under `use strict;` when
the sub doesn't exist at all):
$ perl -E '
use strict; use Fcntl;
say "can", main->can("O_FOO") ? "" : "not";
say defined &O_FOO ? "" : "not ", "defined";
say O_FOO();'
cannot
not defined
Undefined subroutine &main::O_FOO called at -e line 4.
> cheers
>
>
> andrew
- ilmari
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2023-04-12 16:39:12 | Re: longfin missing gssapi_ext.h |
Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2023-04-12 16:37:26 | Re: longfin missing gssapi_ext.h |