On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 01:26:46PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:29:26AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> >Are 'we' sure that such a setup can't lose any data?
> Yes. If you check the archives, you can even find the last time this was
I looked last night (coincidence actually) and didn't find proof that
you cannot lose data.
How do you deal with the file system structure being updated before the
data blocks are (re-)written?
I don't think you can.
> The bottom line is that the only reason you need a metadata journalling
> filesystem is to save the fsck time when you come up. On a little
> partition like xlog, that's not an issue.
fsck isn't only about time to fix. fsck is needed, because the file system
is broken. If the file system is broken, how can you guarantee data has
not been corrupted?
mark(at)mielke(dot)cc / markm(at)ncf(dot)ca / markm(at)nortel(dot)com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Carl Youngblood||Date: 2006-08-15 18:47:54|
|Subject: Re: Beginner optimization questions, esp. regarding Tsearch2|
|Previous:||From: mark||Date: 2006-08-15 18:31:48|
|Subject: Re: Postgresql Performance on an HP DL385 and|