Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKGJ5egYKng4U5PQzv6zcX_7=NvJb_WXiB2gU8NBcohD1kg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 3:14 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> To me it looks like a smaller version of the problem is present in < 14,
> albeit only when the page header is at a record boundary. In that case
> we don't validate the page header immediately, only once it's completely
> read. But we do believe the total size, and try to allocate
> that.
>
> There's a really crufty escape hatch (from 70b4f82a4b) to that:

Right, I made that problem worse, and that could probably be changed
to be no worse than 13 by reordering those operations.

PS Sorry for my intermittent/slow responses on this thread this week,
as I'm mostly away from the keyboard due to personal commitments.
I'll be back in the saddle next week to tidy this up, most likely by
reverting.  The main thought I've been having about this whole area is
that, aside from the lack of general testing of recovery, which we
should definitely address[1], what it really needs is a decent test
harness to drive it through all interesting scenarios and states at a
lower level, independently.

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CA%2BhUKGKpRWQ9SxdxxDmTBCJoR0YnFpMBe7kyzY8SUQk%2BHeskxg%40mail.gmail.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
Next
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch to allow pg_filedump to support reading of pg_filenode.map