From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Franck Routier" <franck(dot)routier(at)axege(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 12 disks raid setup |
Date: | 2008-03-01 12:44:13 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10803010444m3002be30r1b23fbcfac085336@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 4:27 AM, Franck Routier <franck(dot)routier(at)axege(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le vendredi 29 février 2008 à 23:56 -0500, Greg Smith a écrit :
> > Wording is intentional--if you don't have a battery for it, the cache has
> > to be turned off (or set to write-through so it's only being used on
> > reads) in order for the database to be reliable. If you can't finish
> > writes after a power off, you can't cache writes and expect your database
> > to survive for too long.
>
> Well, am I just wrong, or the file system might also heavily rely on
> cache, especially as I use XFS ?
>
> So anyway Postgresql has no way to know if the data is really on the
> disk, and in case of a brutal outage, the system may definitely lose
> data, wether there is another level of caching (Raid controller) or
> not...
>
> Right ?
nope. assuming your disk subsystem doesn't lie about write
completion, then postgresql can recover from complete and sudden loss
of power without any data loss.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig James | 2008-03-01 18:06:54 | How to allocate 8 disks |
Previous Message | Franck Routier | 2008-03-01 10:27:57 | Re: 12 disks raid setup |