Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2014-03-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 03/10/2014 09:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: When GIN changes a metapage, we WAL-log its ex-header content and never use a backup block. This reduces WAL volume since the vast majority of the metapage is unused. However,

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2014-03-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: The attached patch doesn't apply any more, but it looks like this issue still exists. Fixed. Did you forget to push? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2014-03-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 03/12/2014 02:05 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: The attached patch doesn't apply any more, but it looks like this issue still exists. Fixed. Did you forget to push? Yep. Pushed now. - Heikki -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2014-03-10 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: When GIN changes a metapage, we WAL-log its ex-header content and never use a backup block. This reduces WAL volume since the vast majority of the metapage is unused. However, ginRedoUpdateMetapage() only restores the

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2012-05-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Having said all that, I wasn't really arguing that this was a guaranteed safe thing for us to rely on; just pointing out that it's quite likely that the issue hasn't been seen in the field because of this type of

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2012-05-03 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: Are you planning to commit Noah's patch? I wasn't intending to do so personally in the near future; I've got other things on my to-do list. I won't object if somebody else commits it though. regards, tom lane -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2012-05-02 Thread Noah Misch
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:35:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes: When GIN changes a metapage, we WAL-log its ex-header content and never use a backup block. This reduces WAL volume since the vast majority of the metapage is unused. However,

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2012-05-02 Thread Daniel Farina
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: Can we indeed assume that all support-worthy filesystems align the start of every file to a physical sector?  I know little about modern filesystem design, but these references leave me wary of that assumption:

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2012-05-02 Thread Tom Lane
Daniel Farina dan...@heroku.com writes: On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: Can we indeed assume that all support-worthy filesystems align the start of every file to a physical sector? I know little about modern filesystem design, but these references leave me

Re: [HACKERS] Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()

2012-04-30 Thread Tom Lane
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes: When GIN changes a metapage, we WAL-log its ex-header content and never use a backup block. This reduces WAL volume since the vast majority of the metapage is unused. However, ginRedoUpdateMetapage() only restores the WAL-logged content if the metapage