On May21, 2012, at 20:20 , Tom Lane wrote:
> I wonder whether we should dedicate a buffer status bit to show that
> the buffer has been zeroed by zero_damaged_pages and thus doesn't
> reflect what's on disk. Then we could teach autovacuum to not overwrite
> such pages.
+1. The idea of us overwrit
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm? zero_damaged_pages doesn't cause the buffer to be marked dirty,
>> so I dunno where these alleged writes are coming from.
> I'm not sure either, but I'm pretty sure I've seen at least one case
> where turning it on c
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> If we were sure that the kernel error was permanent, then this argument
>>> would be moot: the data is gone already. The scary thought here is that
>>> it might be a
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we were sure that the kernel error was permanent, then this argument
>> would be moot: the data is gone already. The scary thought here is that
>> it might be a transient error, such as a not-always-repeatable kernel
>
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> If we were sure that the kernel error was permanent, then this argument
> would be moot: the data is gone already. The scary thought here is that
> it might be a transient error, such as a not-always-repeatable kernel
> bug. In that case, zeroi
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>>> Yeah, an enum would be nicer than an additional GUC. I kinda keep forgetting
>>> that we have those. Though to bikeshed, the GUC should probably be just
>>> called
>>> 'zero_pages' and take the values 'never', 'mi
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>> Yeah, an enum would be nicer than an additional GUC. I kinda keep forgetting
>> that we have those. Though to bikeshed, the GUC should probably be just
>> called
>> 'zero_pages' and take the values 'never', 'missing', 'unreadable' ;-)
>
>
Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of sáb may 19 03:48:51 -0400 2012:
>
> On May18, 2012, at 23:18 , Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of jue may 17 09:08:26 -0400 2012:
> > Seems to me that we could make zero_damaged_pages an enum. The default
> > value of "on"
On May18, 2012, at 23:18 , Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of jue may 17 09:08:26 -0400 2012:
>> On May16, 2012, at 15:51 , Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>> It is by design, in that the only contemplated case was truncated-away
>>> pages. I'm pretty hesitant to consider allowin
Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of jue may 17 09:08:26 -0400 2012:
> On May16, 2012, at 15:51 , Tom Lane wrote:
> > It is by design, in that the only contemplated case was truncated-away
> > pages. I'm pretty hesitant to consider allowing arbitrary kernel errors
> > to be ignored here …
>
On May16, 2012, at 15:51 , Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> We just came across a situation where a corrupted HFS+ filesystem
>> appears to return ERANGE on a customer machine. Our first reaction was
>> to turn zero_damaged_pages on to allow taking a pg_dump backup of the
>> database,
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié may 16 09:51:26 -0400 2012:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > We just came across a situation where a corrupted HFS+ filesystem
> > appears to return ERANGE on a customer machine. Our first reaction was
> > to turn zero_damaged_pages on to allow taking a pg_dum
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> We just came across a situation where a corrupted HFS+ filesystem
> appears to return ERANGE on a customer machine. Our first reaction was
> to turn zero_damaged_pages on to allow taking a pg_dump backup of the
> database, but surprisingly this does not work. A quick gla
Hi,
We just came across a situation where a corrupted HFS+ filesystem
appears to return ERANGE on a customer machine. Our first reaction was
to turn zero_damaged_pages on to allow taking a pg_dump backup of the
database, but surprisingly this does not work. A quick glance at the
code shows the
14 matches
Mail list logo
