Re: Opteron scaling with PostgreSQL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Opteron scaling with PostgreSQL
Date: 2004-06-12 17:33:21
Message-ID: 26476.1087061601@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Steve Wolfe <nw(at)codon(dot)com> writes:
>> I've run with fsync off on my production servers for years.

> All it will take will be a Linux crash for the database files on disk to
> become corrupted. No amount of UPS or RAID protection will protect from that.

And neither will fsync'ing, so I'm not sure what your point is. Steve
clearly understands the need for backups, so I think he's prepared as
well as he can for worst-case scenarios. He's determined that the
particular scenarios fsync can protect him against are not big enough
risks *in his environment* to justify the cost. I can't say that I see
any flaws in his reasoning.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jack Orenstein 2004-06-12 17:44:34 Re: Trying to minimize the impact of checkpoints
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2004-06-12 17:27:22 Re: Trying to minimize the impact of checkpoints