Re: Creation of an empty table is not fsync'd at checkpoint

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Creation of an empty table is not fsync'd at checkpoint
Date: 2022-01-27 22:11:28
Message-ID: CA+hUKGLDdKOays2Z+pkOyr5y89YCS1yg=BPDeeL+EALZ6pWURQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 8:12 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 6:55 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> > I think the simplest fix is to call register_dirty_segment() from
> > mdcreate(). As in the attached. Thoughts?
>
> +1

[Testing]

Erm, so now I see my new table in checkpoint's activities:

openat(AT_FDCWD,"base/5/16399",O_RDWR,00) = 20 (0x14)
fsync(20) = 0 (0x0)

... but we still never synchronize "base/5". According to our
project's reading of the POSIX tea leaves we should be doing that to
nail down the directory entry.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-01-27 22:16:17 Re: A test for replay of regression tests
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-01-27 22:07:55 Re: A test for replay of regression tests