Re: On Linux Filesystems

From: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: On Linux Filesystems
Date: 2003-08-12 16:47:18
Message-ID: 20030812164718.GC12976@libertyrms.info
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 09:36:21AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> So it's a tradeoff with loss of performance vs. recovery time. In
> a server room with redundant backup power supplies, "clean room"
> security and fail-over services, I can certainly imagine that data
> journalling would not be needed.

You can have all the redundant power, high availability hardware, and
ultra-Robocop security going, and still have crashes: so far as I
know, _nobody_ makes perfectly reliable hardware, and the harder you
push it, the more likely you are to find trouble. And certainly,
when you have a surprise outage because the CPU where the kernel
happened to be burned itself up, an extra hour or two offline while
you do fsck is liable to make you cry out variations of those four
letters more than once. :-/

A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message wind.claudio@inwind.it 2003-08-12 17:00:35 Statement-level Triggers
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2003-08-12 16:41:59 Re: concatenation = = transaction ?????

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Travers 2003-08-12 17:26:17 Re: about performance of postgreSQL
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2003-08-12 16:36:21 Re: On Linux Filesystems