Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYit4Kn8TFXMLzoZSvKK9OXDjU8pMap9phg-vfC5hcxzQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do we really need to set LSN on this page (or mark it dirty), if so
> why?  Are you worried about restoration of FPI or something else?

I haven't thought through all of the possible consequences and am a
bit to tired to do so just now, but doesn't it seem rather risky to
invent a whole new way of using these xlog functions?
src/backend/access/transam/README describes how to do write-ahead
logging properly, and neither MarkBufferDirty() nor PageSetLSN() is
described as an optional step.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool)
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading postmaster's log messages about bind/listen errors