Re: pg_basebackup, pg_receivexlog and data durability (was: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions)

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: pg_basebackup, pg_receivexlog and data durability (was: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions)
Date: 2016-09-03 13:30:24
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQ2To_Xj__EaExQAw=Pd+Q=DBaH1HmBND=pD4whQZmRiw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> Yes, we should definitely not allow that combination. In fact, maybe that
> argument in itself is enough not to have it for pg_receivexlog -- the cause
> of confusion.
>
> I can see how you might want to avoid it for pg_basebackup during testing
> for example,. but the overhead on pg_receivexlog shouldn't be as bad in
> testing, should it?

No, I haven't tested directly but it should not be.. pg_basebackup
does always a bulk write, while pg_receivexlog depends on the server
activity.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2016-09-03 13:35:55 Re: pg_basebackup stream xlog to tar
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2016-09-03 13:26:35 Re: pg_basebackup, pg_receivexlog and data durability (was: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions)