On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 18:53 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Regarding sync commits that previously happen and now won't, I think the
> only case worth worrying about is the one in vacuum.c. Do we need a
> ForceSyncCommit() in there? I'm not sure if vacuum itself already
> forces sync commit.
VACUUM FULL requires ForceSyncCommit().
Not sure why removing them elsewhere is important? Getting robustness
wrong is a big, bad thing and this opens us to future error. We already
tuned VACUUM so it does very little if it has no work to do, why would
one extra I/O improve things so much? If it ain't broke...
VACUUM does so many things that I'd rather have it all safely on disk.
I'd feel happier with the rule "VACUUM always sync commits", so we all
remember it and can rely upon it to be the same from release to release.
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2009-09-01 07:45:35|
|Subject: binary compat|
|Previous:||From: Jeff Janes||Date: 2009-09-01 03:06:58|
|Subject: pgbench hard coded constants|