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

On 3 Sep. 2016 9:22 pm, "Michael Paquier" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Michael Paquier <
michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> >> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> > On 5/13/16 2:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> What do others think about that? I could implement that on top of 0002
> >> with some extra options. But to be honest that looks to be just some
> >> extra sugar for what is basically a bug fix... And I am feeling that
> >> providing such a switch to users would be a way for one to shoot
> >> himself badly, particularly for pg_receivexlog where a crash can cause
> >> segments to go missing.
> >>
> >
> > Well, why do we provide a --nosync option for initdb? Wouldn't the
argument
> > basically be the same?
>
> Yes, the good-for-testing-but-not-production argument.

We need it for tap tests. More and more will use pg_basebackup and it'll
start hurting test speeds badly.