From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System |
Date: | 2003-01-30 20:27:46 |
Message-ID: | 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8859B@mail.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 30 January 2003 15:56
> To: Hannu Krosing
> Cc: Vince Vielhaber; Dave Page; Ron Mayer;
> pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System
>
>
> In the pull-the-plug case you have to worry about what is on
> disk at any given instant and whether you can make all the
> bits on disk consistent again. (And also about whether your
> filesystem can perform the equivalent exercise for its own
> metadata; which is why we are questioning Windows here.
I've never (to my knowledge) lost any data following a powerfail or
system crash on a system using NTFS - that has always seemed pretty
solid to me. By comparison, I have lost data on ext2 filesystems on a
couple of occasions.
More info at:
http://www.ntfs.com/data-integrity.htm
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/ntfs/relRec-c.html
Obviously this goes out of the window is the user chooses to run on
FAT/FAT32 partitions. I think that it should be made *very* clear in any
future documentation that the user is strongly advised to use only NTFS
filesystems.
I realise this is not proof that it actually works of course...
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-30 20:29:50 | Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System |
Previous Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2003-01-30 20:05:37 | Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System |