| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump, pg_dumpall and data durability |
| Date: | 2016-11-13 03:00:35 |
| Message-ID: | 1bf5b126-fd1f-6659-ef12-69e54081fda5@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/8/16 3:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> First question: Do we even want this? Generally, when a program
> writes to a file, we rely on the operating system to decide when that
> data should be written back to disk. We have to override that
> distinction for things internal to PostgreSQL because we need certain
> bits of data to reach the disk in a certain order, but it's unclear to
> me how far outside the core database system we want to extend that.
I had voiced a similar concern previously:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/f8dff810-f5f4-77c3-933b-127df4ed94e5@2ndquadrant.com
At the time, there were no other comments, so we went ahead with it,
which presumably gave encouragement to pursue the current patch.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-11-13 03:06:39 | Re: WAL consistency check facility |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-11-12 22:48:04 | Re: pg_dump, pg_dumpall and data durability |