From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 5BB672C84B for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 15:05:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eiQzfs6LIf_s for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 15:05:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id 12C662C845 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 15:05:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smtpng3.m.smailru.net with esmtpa (envelope-from ) id 1gCUeg-0007iI-BI for tarantool-patches@freelists.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 22:05:22 +0300 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 22:05:22 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Delete old WAL files if running out of disk space Message-ID: <20181016190522.GH5454@chai> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Reply-To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: tarantool-patches List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org * Vladimir Davydov [18/10/08 13:52]: > If a replica permanently stops working for some reason, it will pin WAL > files it would need to resume until it is deleted from the _cluster > system space or the master is restarted. This happens in production when > an admin drops a replica and forgets to remove it from the master, and > this is quite annoying, because it may result in ENOSPC errors on the > master. I started benching this patch to check whether fallocate() introduces a performance regression and discovered that there is a general 45% regression between 1.6 and 1.10. I hope finally once I have pointed it out and A.Lyapunov has pointed it out, it will be addressed. In any case we need to measure fallocate() impact very carefully before adding it. It seems we make things unnecessarily complicated all in order to spare the user from spurious ENOSPC, In my opinion it's a non-goal. If we get rid of this requirement, we don't need fallocate(), and the patch could be made simpler in a couple more dimensions. Please consider making a trivial patch which follows the steps of the patch by @belyak Thanks, -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia, +7 903 626 22 32 http://tarantool.io - www.twitter.com/kostja_osipov