Re: Block-level CRC checks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Block-level CRC checks
Date
Msg-id 10407.1222904484@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Block-level CRC checks  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Block-level CRC checks  (Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>)
List pgsql-hackers
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> a) You wouldn't have to keep the lock while doing the I/O.

Hoo, yeah, so the period of holding the share-lock could well be
*shorter* than it is now.  Most especially so if the write() blocks
instead of just transferring the data to kernel space and returning.

I wonder whether that could mean that it's a win to double-buffer
even if we aren't computing a checksum?  Nah, probably not.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Next
From: "Matthew T. O'Connor"
Date:
Subject: Re: September CommitFest Closed