From: | "Koichi Suzuki" <koichi(dot)szk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mike <mike(at)fonolo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: intercepting WAL writes |
Date: | 2008-05-29 03:28:15 |
Message-ID: | a778a7260805282028p4b3c0baby3978eacf33ca697@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
And you will have a chance to encounter full page writes, whole page
image, which could be produced during the hot backup and the first
modification to the data page after a checkpoint (if you turn full
page write option "on" by GUC).
2008/5/29 Mike <mike(at)fonolo(dot)com>:
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Mike <mike(at)fonolo(dot)com> wrote:
>>> When you say a bit of decoding, is that because the data written to the
> logs
>>> is after the query parser/planner? Or because it's written in several
>>> chunks? Or?
>>
>>Because that's the actual recovery record. There is no SQL text, just
>>the WAL record type (XLOG_HEAP_INSERT, XLOG_HEAP_UPDATE,
>>XLOG_XACT_COMMIT, ...) and the data as it relates to that operation.
>
> Oh- right- that makes sense.
>
> I installed and started looking at the source code for xlogviewer and
> xlogdump; seems like a reasonable place to start.
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Mike
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
--
------
Koichi Suzuki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-05-29 03:34:14 | Re: [HACKERS] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1 |
Previous Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2008-05-29 03:22:34 | Re: Re: [HACKERS] How embarrassing: optimization of a one-shot query doesn't work |