Re: [HACKERS] Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate'em

2001-07-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
> * Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > | Most Unix filesystems will not allocate disk blocks until you write in > | them. If you just seek out past end-of-file, the file pointer is moved > | but the blocks are unallocated. This is how 'ls' can show a 1gb file > | that only uses 4k of

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate'em

2001-07-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE -- Start of PGP signed section. > Hi - > > pgman wrote: > > : Most Unix filesystems will not allocate disk blocks until you write in > : them. [...] > > Yes, I understand that, but how is it a problem for postgresql? Uh, I thought we did that so we

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate'em

2001-07-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
> Could you explain how postgresql can "fall victim" the filesystem hole > mechanism? Just hoping to force actual storage allocation, or hoping > to discourage fragmentation? Most Unix filesystems will not allocate disk blocks until you write in them. If you just seek out past end-of-file, the