Weird WAL numbering - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Christopher Kings-Lynne
Subject Weird WAL numbering
Date
Msg-id GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOGEKECBAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Weird WAL numbering  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
In my logs I have this:

2002-03-05 23:59:26 DEBUG:  MoveOfflineLogs: remove 0000000200000054
2002-03-05 23:59:26 DEBUG:  MoveOfflineLogs: remove 0000000200000055
2002-03-05 23:59:26 DEBUG:  MoveOfflineLogs: remove 0000000200000053
2002-03-05 23:59:38 DEBUG:  XLogWrite: new log file created - consider
increasing WAL_FILES
2002-03-06 00:00:10 DEBUG:  XLogWrite: new log file created - consider
increasing WAL_FILES
2002-03-06 00:00:23 DEBUG:  XLogWrite: new log file created - consider
increasing WAL_FILES
2002-03-06 00:00:25 DEBUG:  MoveOfflineLogs: remove 0000000200000057
2002-03-06 00:00:25 DEBUG:  MoveOfflineLogs: remove 0000000200000058
2002-03-06 00:00:25 DEBUG:  MoveOfflineLogs: remove 0000000200000056
2002-03-06 00:01:38 DEBUG:  XLogWrite: new log file created - consider
increasing WAL_FILES

Notice the '2' in the middle of the WAL file name?  It was '1' for quite a
while.  I get the feeling it increments when an overflow occurs, just as
going from 'FF' to '100' sort of thing.

ie. Is there an endian problem here?  Is it purely cosmetic?  Is it
deliberate?

usa=# select version();                          version
--------------------------------------------------------------PostgreSQL 7.1.3 on i386--freebsd4.3, compiled by GCC
2.95.2
(1 row)

uname -a
FreeBSD xxx 4.4-RELEASE FreeBSD 4.4-RELEASE #4: Mon Jan 21 0
7:14:44 GMT 2002     xxx:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CANAVERAL  i386

Chris



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: elog() patch
Next
From: Turbo Fredriksson
Date:
Subject: Drop in performance for each INSERT/DELETE combo