| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |
| Date: | 2018-04-28 16:08:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20180428160826.2e37ncq2cuh6rh34@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-04-28 11:10:54 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> When we crash-restart, we also go through and clean things up some, no?
> Seems like that gives us the potential to end up fixing things ourselves
> and allowing the crash-restart to succeed.
Sure, there's the potential for that. But it's quite possible to be
missing a lot of free space over NFS (this really isn't much of an issue
for local FS, at least not on linux) in a workload with rapidly
expanding space usage. And even if you recover, you could just hit the
issue again shortly afterwards.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-04-28 16:11:05 | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2018-04-28 16:00:32 | Re: [GENERAL] huge RAM use in multi-command ALTER of table heirarchy |