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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date
Msg-id 4543.1120405772@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Responses Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> Can someone explain exactly what the problem being defeated by writing whole
> pages to the WAL log?

Partial writes.  Without the full-page image, we do not have enough
information in WAL to reconstruct the correct page contents.

>> A further optimization would be to write the backup pages to the same 8k
>> file over and over again rather than adding I/O to pg_xlog WAL files.

How does that work, and why is it a win compared to doing the same
amount of I/O to WAL?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Marko Kreen
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE?