| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
| Date: | 2018-04-05 19:33:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20180405193314.GC29402@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 03:09:57PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> ENOSPC doesn't seem to be a concern during normal operation of major file
> systems (ext3, ext4, btrfs, xfs) because they reserve space before returning
> from write(). But if a buffered write does manage to fail due to ENOSPC we'll
> definitely see the same problems. This makes ENOSPC on NFS a potentially data
> corrupting condition since NFS doesn't preallocate space before returning from
> write().
This does explain why NFS has a reputation for unreliability for
Postgres.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-04-05 19:34:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-04-05 19:31:53 | Re: SET TRANSACTION in PL/pgSQL |