Re: [DOCS] pg_total_relation_size() and CHECKPOINT

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Gregory Stark
Тема Re: [DOCS] pg_total_relation_size() and CHECKPOINT
Дата
Msg-id 87myp1f9a7.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [DOCS] pg_total_relation_size() and CHECKPOINT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [DOCS] pg_total_relation_size() and CHECKPOINT
Список pgsql-hackers
"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

> "Zubkovsky, Sergey" <Sergey.Zubkovsky@transas.com> writes:
>> The previous results were received on PG 8.3 version:
>>     "PostgreSQL 8.3.0, compiled by Visual C++ build 1400"
>
> Hmm.  I find the whole thing fairly worrisome, because what it suggests
> is that Windows isn't actually allocating file space during smgrextend,
> which would mean that we'd be prone to running out of disk space at
> unfortunate times --- like during a checkpoint, after we've already
> promised the client the data is committed.

Surely we can't lose after the fsync? Losing at commit rather than at the time
of insert might still be poor, but how could we lose after we've promised the
data is committed?

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication
support!


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix vacuum so that autovacuum is really not cancelled when doing
Следующее
От: Gregory Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Commit fest?