|From:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>|
|To:||Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: initdb -S and tablespaces|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2015-05-08 22:08:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> That seems a bit better. I think it's really important, if we're
> going to start to try to make fsync=off anything other than a toy,
I think it's long past that. I've seen many, many people use it during
initial data loading.
> that we document really clearly the circumstances in which it is or is
> not safe:
Yea, we really should have done that a long time ago.
> - If you crash while fsync=off, your cluster may be corrupted.
HW crash, right?
> - If you crash while fsync=on, but it was off at the last checkpoint,
> your cluster may be corrupted.
> - If you turn fsync=off, do stuff, turn fsync=on, and checkpoint
> successfully, a subsequent crash should not corrupt anything.
> Of course, even the last one isn't totally bullet-proof. Suppose one
> backend fails to absorb the new setting for some reason...
I've a hard time worrying much about that one...
|Next Message||Tom Lane||2015-05-09 21:40:50||Re: initdb -S and tablespaces|
|Previous Message||Stephen Frost||2015-05-09 18:46:48||Re: Typo in reindexdb documentation|