Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobZsJXOcXtnVnYoqOXXOi7oRgRen9bHpnjeiG1Y5mpdzw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 12:39 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > One question that occurred to me when looking this over is whether, or
> > why, it's safe against concurrent smgr invalidations.
>
> We are only accessing the smgr of the source database and the
> destination database.  And there is no one else that can be connected
> to the source db and the destination db is not visible to anyone.  So
> do we really need to worry about the concurrent smgr invalidation?
> What am I missing?

A sinval reset can occur at any moment due to an overflow of the
queue. That acts as a universal reset of everything. So you can't
reason on the basis of what somebody might be sending.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yugo NAGATA
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WIP aPatch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.