Re: Sequences - jumped after power failure
От | Steve T |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sequences - jumped after power failure |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1208279040.27471.303.camel@retsol610 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sequences - jumped after power failure (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
Cheers Tom.
I'll note that down under the section '...things to note should the server crash...' - just under the note that says '...get a UPS...'
On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 10:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I'll note that down under the section '...things to note should the server crash...' - just under the note that says '...get a UPS...'
On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 10:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Steve T <steve@retsol.co.uk> writes: > I have a set of claims tables that cover the claim itself, the customer, > contact points etc. Yesterday there was a power failure and the server > suffered an immediate power outage. When the server came back, > everything seemed fine, apart from the fact that the claim related > sequences had all jumped and left a gap of 33 (last was 52 before power > failure, next one allocated after power failure 85). This seems > consistent across all the tables related to the claim (it may be across > the tables in the database - I haven't checked all of them as yet). > Does this sound feasible and if so, what is the cause? Yeah, this is intentional behavior designed to reduce the amount of disk write traffic generated by nextval()s. From a standing start, a nextval() actually advances the sequence 33 times (1 + SEQ_LOG_VALS), so that the next 32 nextval()s won't need to generate their own WAL records. I guess you must have crashed before that first nextval() was able to commit its result into the database ... regards, tom lane
|
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: