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

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers
Date
Msg-id d99fa72cec855bf84064f74e4b576c72a9a6d033.camel@j-davis.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Responses Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
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?

Regards,
    Jeff Davis





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiro Ikeda
Date:
Subject: Re: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers