Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Commit9df56f6

Browse files
Add new README file for pages/checksums
1 parent96ef3b8 commit9df56f6

File tree

1 file changed

+52
-0
lines changed
  • src/backend/storage/page

1 file changed

+52
-0
lines changed

‎src/backend/storage/page/README

Lines changed: 52 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
1+
src/backend/storage/page/README
2+
3+
Checksums
4+
---------
5+
6+
Checksums on data pages are designed to detect corruption by the I/O system.
7+
We do not protect buffers against uncorrectable memory errors, since these
8+
have a very low measured incidence according to research on large server farms,
9+
http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~bianca/papers/sigmetrics09.pdf, discussed
10+
2010/12/22 on -hackers list.
11+
12+
Current implementation requires this be enabled system-wide at initdb time.
13+
14+
The checksum is not valid at all times on a data page!!
15+
The checksum is valid when the page leaves the shared pool and is checked
16+
when it later re-enters the shared pool as a result of I/O.
17+
We set the checksum on a buffer in the shared pool immediately before we
18+
flush the buffer. As a result we implicitly invalidate the page's checksum
19+
when we modify the page for a data change or even a hint. This means that
20+
many or even most pages in shared buffers have invalid page checksums,
21+
so be careful how you interpret the pd_checksum field.
22+
23+
That means that WAL-logged changes to a page do NOT update the page checksum,
24+
so full page images may not have a valid checksum. But those page images have
25+
the WAL CRC covering them and so are verified separately from this
26+
mechanism. WAL replay should not test the checksum of a full-page image.
27+
28+
The best way to understand this is that WAL CRCs protect records entering the
29+
WAL stream, and data page verification protects blocks entering the shared
30+
buffer pool. They are similar in purpose, yet completely separate. Together
31+
they ensure we are able to detect errors in data re-entering
32+
PostgreSQL-controlled memory. Note also that the WAL checksum is a 32-bit CRC,
33+
whereas the page checksum is only 16-bits.
34+
35+
Any write of a data block can cause a torn page if the write is unsuccessful.
36+
Full page writes protect us from that, which are stored in WAL. Setting hint
37+
bits when a page is already dirty is OK because a full page write must already
38+
have been written for it since the last checkpoint. Setting hint bits on an
39+
otherwise clean page can allow torn pages; this doesn't normally matter since
40+
they are just hints, but when the page has checksums, then losing a few bits
41+
would cause the checksum to be invalid. So if we have full_page_writes = on
42+
and checksums enabled then we must write a WAL record specifically so that we
43+
record a full page image in WAL. Hint bits updates should be protected using
44+
MarkBufferDirtyHint(), which is responsible for writing the full-page image
45+
when necessary.
46+
47+
New WAL records cannot be written during recovery, so hint bits set during
48+
recovery must not dirty the page if the buffer is not already dirty, when
49+
checksums are enabled. Systems in Hot-Standby mode may benefit from hint bits
50+
being set, but with checksums enabled, a page cannot be dirtied after setting a
51+
hint bit (due to the torn page risk). So, it must wait for full-page images
52+
containing the hint bit updates to arrive from the master.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp