Re: AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
Date
Msg-id 20160802183347.GD32575@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
Responses Re: AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
Re: AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 05:42:43PM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> Even so, I'd be curious whether it would break anything to have
> xlp_pageaddr simply set to InvalidXLogRecPtr in the dummy zero
> pages written to fill out a segment. At least until it's felt
> that archive_timeout has been so decidedly obsoleted by streaming
> replication that it is removed, and the log-tail zeroing code
> with it.
> 
> That at least would eliminate the risk of anyone else repeating
> my astonishment. :)  I had read that 9.4 added built-in log-zeroing
> code, and my first reaction was "cool! that may make the compression
> technique we're using unnecessary, but certainly can't make it worse"
> only to discover that it did, by ~ 300x, becoming now 3x *worse* than
> plain gzip, which itself is ~ 100x worse than what we had.

My guess is that the bytes are there to detect problems where a 512-byte
disk sector is zeroed by a disk failure.  I don't see use changing that
for the use-case you have described.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: PostmasterContext survives into parallel workers!?
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Increasing timeout of poll_query_until for TAP tests