Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers
Date
Msg-id CAH2-Wz=15hLpbKRWTff5W=e31j3BRN0z24QCad5EBo1jVk_y5w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:52 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 18:42 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > We still need to put the reliance on ltsWriteBlock() allocating many
> > blocks before they've been logically written on some kind of formal
> > footing for Postgres 13 -- it is now possible that an all-zero block
> > will be left behind even after we're done writing and have flushed
> > all
> > temp buffers, which is a new thing.
>
> Is the current direction of this thread (i.e. the two posted patches)
> addressing your concern here?

Yes.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers
Next
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: Allow ERROR from heap_prepare_freeze_tuple to be downgraded to WARNING