Re: I/O on select count(*) - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: I/O on select count(*)
Date
Msg-id 4758.1210863178@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: I/O on select count(*)  (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>)
List pgsql-performance
Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org> writes:
> Hmm. That problem is what WAL full-page-writes is meant to handle, isn't
> it? So basically, if you're telling people that WAL full-page-writes is
> safer than partial WAL, because it avoids updating pages in-place, then
> you shouldn't be updating pages in-place for the hint bits either. You
> can't win!

This argument ignores the nature of the data change.  With a hint-bit
update, no data is being shuffled around, so there is no danger from a
partial page write.

A disk that leaves an individual sector corrupt would be a problem,
but I don't think that's a huge risk.  Keep in mind that disks aren't
designed to just stop dead when power dies --- they are made to be able
to park their heads before the juice is entirely gone.  I think it's
reasonable to assume they'll finish writing the sector in progress
before they start parking.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: I/O on select count(*)
Next
From: Craig James
Date:
Subject: Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql