On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 11:33:33AM +0800, Paul Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 3:47 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > + fsync_fname("global/pg_control", false);
> > + fsync_fname("backup_label", false);
> > + if (access("recovery.conf", F_OK) == 0)
> > + fsync_fname("recovery.conf", f
Thanks for reviewing, please see the replies below.
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 3:47 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 06:18:03PM +0800, Paul Guo wrote:
> > I modified the copy_file_range() patch using the below logic:
> >
> > If the first call of copy_file_range() fails with errn
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 04:47:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> One argument
> against this approach is that if pg_rewind fails in the middle of its
> operation then we would have done a set of fsync() for nothing, with
> the data folder still unusable.
I was skimming through the patch this mor
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 06:18:03PM +0800, Paul Guo wrote:
> I modified the copy_file_range() patch using the below logic:
>
> If the first call of copy_file_range() fails with errno EXDEV or
> ENOTSUP, pg_rewind
> would not use copy_file_range() in rest code, and if copy_file_range() fails
> we
>
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 11:08 AM Paul Guo wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 3:19 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 05:02:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 06:20:30PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > > The main thing I noticed was that Linux
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 3:19 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 05:02:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 06:20:30PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > The main thing I noticed was that Linux < 5.3 can fail with EXDEV if
> > > you cross a filesystem boun
No worry I’m work on this.
On 2021/6/17, 3:18 PM, "Michael Paquier" wrote:
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 05:02:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 06:20:30PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > The main thing I noticed was that Linux < 5.3 can fail with EXDEV if
> > you cross a file
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 05:02:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 06:20:30PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > The main thing I noticed was that Linux < 5.3 can fail with EXDEV if
> > you cross a filesystem boundary, is that something we need to worry
> > about there?
>
> Hmm
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 06:20:30PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> The main thing I noticed was that Linux < 5.3 can fail with EXDEV if
> you cross a filesystem boundary, is that something we need to worry
> about there?
Hmm. Good point. That may justify having a switch to control that.
--
Michael
On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 5:20 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> Note: FreeBSD 13~ has support for copy_file_range(), nice.. Adding
> Thomas in CC in case I am missing something.
Yeah, so at least in theory Linux and FreeBSD can now both do tricks
like pushing copies down to network filesystems, COW file
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 05:30:51AM +, Paul Guo wrote:
> Did some small modification and rebased the code. See attached for the new
> version.
Regarding patch 0002, I find the inter-dependencies between
write_target_range() and copy_target_range() a bit confusing. There
is also a bit of dupli
> On 2021/2/19, 10:33 AM, "Paul Guo" wrote:
> Refactored the code a bit along with fixes. Manually tested them on centos
> & Ubuntu (the later has copy_file_range())
> For the first patch, actually I have some concerns. My assumption is that
> the target pg_data directory should be fsync-ed alr
Refactored the code a bit along with fixes. Manually tested them on centos
& Ubuntu (the later has copy_file_range())
For the first patch, actually I have some concerns. My assumption is that
the target pg_data directory should be fsync-ed already. This should be
correct normally but there is one
On Jan 28, 2021, at 3:31 PM, Michael Paquier
mailto:mich...@paquier.xyz>> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:18:48AM +, Paul Guo wrote:
Second one is use copy_file_range() for the local rewind case to replace
read()+write().
This introduces copy_file_range() check and HAVE_COPY_FILE_RANGE s
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:18:48AM +, Paul Guo wrote:
> Second one is use copy_file_range() for the local rewind case to replace
> read()+write().
> This introduces copy_file_range() check and HAVE_COPY_FILE_RANGE so other
> code could use copy_file_range() if needed. copy_file_range() was int
While reading pg_rewind code I found two things could speed up pg_rewind.
Attached are the patches.
First one: pg_rewind would fsync the whole pgdata directory on the target by
default,
but that is a waste since usually just part of the files/directories on
the target are modified. Other files o
16 matches
Mail list logo
