Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmoa+mACK8j2TbqgjTYvgz1tPJa0uFxu4upTARw_xnkQw_Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Torn page hazard in ginRedoUpdateMetapage()
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Having said all that, I wasn't really arguing that this was a guaranteed
> safe thing for us to rely on; just pointing out that it's quite likely
> that the issue hasn't been seen in the field because of this type of
> consideration.

Well, we do rely, in numerous places, on writes << 512 bytes not
getting torn.  pd_prune_xid, index tuple kills, heap tuple hint bits,
relmapper files, etc.  We generally assume, for example, that a 4-byte
write which is 4-byte aligned does not need to be WAL-logged, which
would be necessary if we thought that the write might be torn.

Are you planning to commit Noah's patch?

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER DATABASE and datallowconn
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER DATABASE and datallowconn