Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date
Msg-id 200507070429.j674TKT04852@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to> writes:
> > Are you sure about that? That would probably be the normal case, but are
> > you promised that the hardware will write all of the sectors of a block
> > in order?
> 
> I don't think you can possibly assume that.  If the block crosses a
> cylinder boundary then it's certainly an unsafe assumption, and even
> within a cylinder (no seek required) I'm pretty sure that disk drives
> have understood "write the next sector that passes under the heads"
> for decades.

SCSI tagged queueing certainly allows 512-byte blocks to be reordered
during writes.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Mistake in latest plperl patch