From: "Nathan Myers" <ncm(at)zembu(dot)com>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 07:02:01PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
[snip]
> The logging in 7.1 protects transactions against many sources of
> database crash, but not necessarily against OS crash, and certainly
> not against power failure.  (You might get lucky, or you might just
> think you were lucky.)  This is the same as for most databases; an
> embedded database that talks directly to the hardware might be able
> to do better.
>

If PG had a type of tree based logging filesystem, that it self handles,
wouldn't that be almost perfectly safe? I mean that you might lose some data
in an transaction, but the client never gets an OK anyways...
Like a combination of raw block io and tux2 like fs.
Doesn't Oracle do it's own block io, no?

Magnus

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 Programmer/Networker [|] Magnus Naeslund
 PGP Key: http://www.genline.nu/mag_pgp.txt
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

In response to

• Re: beta testing version at 2000-11-30 23:35:59 from Nathan Myers

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Don Baccus	Date: 2000-12-02 19:31:37
	Subject: Re: beta testing version
Previous:	From: Peter Eisentraut	Date: 2000-12-02 16:42:38
	Subject: Re: beta testing version