Re: crash-safe visibility map, take four - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: crash-safe visibility map, take four
Date
Msg-id AANLkTikjnqmg87MJ+As_YNz+k42tkJ_nx6jN9r9aKsWq@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: crash-safe visibility map, take four  (Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: crash-safe visibility map, take four
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram
<gokul007@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I took a crack at implementing the first approach described above,
>> which seems to be by far the simplest idea we've come up with to date.
>>  Patch attached.  It doesn't seem to be that complicated, which could
>> mean either that it's not that complicated or that I'm missing
>> something.  Feel free to point and snicker in the latter case.
>>
> Hi,
>     I suppose the problem is not with setting the bit, but resetting the
> bit. Has that been completed already?
> Thanks.

All operations that clear the bit area are already WAL-logged.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Date:
Subject: Re: crash-safe visibility map, take four
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_ctl restart - behaviour based on wrong instance