From: | Anthony Iliopoulos <ailiop(at)altatus(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, ailiop(at)altatus(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
Date: | 2018-04-01 01:14:46 |
Message-ID: | 20180401011446.GK11627@technoir |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 12:38:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > So we should just use the big hammer here.
>
> And bitch, loudly and publicly, about how broken this kernel behavior is.
> If we make enough of a stink maybe it'll get fixed.
It is not likely to be fixed (beyond what has been done already with the
manpage patches and errseq_t fixes on the reporting level). The issue is,
the kernel needs to deal with hard IO errors at that level somehow, and
since those errors typically persist, re-dirtying the pages would not
really solve the problem (unless some filesystem remaps the request to a
different block, assuming the device is alive). Keeping around dirty
pages that cannot possibly be written out is essentially a memory leak,
as those pages would stay around even after the application has exited.
Best regards,
Anthony
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-04-01 02:43:45 | Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification |
Previous Message | Anthony Iliopoulos | 2018-04-01 00:58:22 | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |