ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@gridgain.com>
Subject Re: WAL Archive Issue
Date Tue, 13 Feb 2018 18:35:57 GMT
Ivan,

I do not want to create new files. As far as I know, now we copy segments
to archive dir before they get checkpointed. What I suggest is to copy them
to a temp dir under wal directory and then move to archive. In my
understanding at the time we copy the files to a temp folder all changes to
them are already fsynced.

Correct?

Yakov Zhdanov,
www.gridgain.com

2018-02-13 21:29 GMT+03:00 Ivan Rakov <ivan.glukos@gmail.com>:

> Yakov,
>
> I see the only one problem with your suggestion - number of
> "uncheckpointed" segments is potentially unlimited.
> Right now we have limited number (10) of file segments with immutable
> names in WAL "work" directory. We have to keep this approach due to known
> bug in XFS - fsync time is nearly twice bigger for recently created files.
>
> Best Regards,
> Ivan Rakov
>
>
> On 13.02.2018 21:22, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
>
>> I meant we still will be copying segment once and then will be moving it
>> to
>> archive which should not affect file system much.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --Yakov
>>
>> 2018-02-13 21:19 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhdanov@apache.org>:
>>
>> Alex,
>>>
>>> I remember we had some confusing behavior for WAL archive when archived
>>> segments were required for successful recovery.
>>>
>>> Is issue still present?
>>>
>>> If yes, what if we copy "uncheckpointed" segments to a directory under
>>> wal
>>> directory and then move the segments to archive after checkpoint? Will
>>> this
>>> work?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> --Yakov
>>>
>>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message