Re: PITR Dead horse?

From: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: ntufar(at)pisem(dot)net, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PITR Dead horse?
Date: 2004-02-05 14:12:59
Message-ID: 1075990378.308.410.camel@jester
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Don't know. But apparently different users will have
> > different demands From a database.
>
> Of course, but I would argue that my claim that PostgreSQL is reliable
> is backed up by the lack of people posting messages like 'we had a
> powercut and now my DB is hosed'.

One thing we could use (and I have no idea how to do it) is a "This
hardware is not appropriate for a database" test kit.

Something to detect lying disks, battery backed write cache that isn't
so battery backed, etc.

--
Rod Taylor <rbt [at] rbt [dot] ca>

Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-02-05 14:34:33 Re: [PATCHES] log session end - again
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2004-02-05 14:05:53 Vacuum Delay feature