Re: more anti-postgresql FUD

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 01:35:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> looked reasonably robust --- ie, both safe and not full of unsupportable
> assumptions about knowing exactly where everything actually is on the
> disk platter. It'd still be interesting if anyone gets a new idea...

Might it be the case that WAL is the one area where, for Postgres,
the cost of using raw disk could conceivably be worth the benefit?
(I.e. you end up having to write a domain-specific filesystemish
thing that is optimised for exactly your cases)? (And before you ask
me, no I'm not volunteering :( )

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
A certain description of men are for getting out of debt, yet are
against all taxes for raising money to pay it off.
--Alexander Hamilton