Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes

On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 18:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > On 12/7/10 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Another point here is that it's not clear why we're selecting a
> >> known-to-be-insecure default on OS X (where in fact all methods except
> >> fsync_writethrough fail to push data to disk). We've been around on
> >> that before, of course, and maybe now is not the time to change it.
>
> > Because nobody sane uses OSX on the server?
>
> Some of us would make the same remark about Windows. But we go out of
> our way to provide a safe default on that platform anyhow.

Not to mention the assertion that people don't use OSX on a server is
patently false. They don't use it on big servers, but it is very popular
for the SMB (big time capital S).

JD

--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt