Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)
Date: 2018-05-09 22:55:55
Message-ID: 20180509225555.rmk3azmgrwfwudw5@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-05-01 09:38:03 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 1 May 2018 at 00:09, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> > It's not. Only SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WAIT_{BEFORE,AFTER} eat errors. Which
> > seems sensible, because they could be considered data integrity
> > operations.
>
> Ah, I misread that. Thankyou.
>
> >> I'm very suspicious about the safety of the msync() path too.
> >
> > That seems justified however:
>
> I'll add EIO tests there.

Do you have a patchset including that? I didn't find anything after a
quick search...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2018-05-10 00:48:50 Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-05-09 21:08:47 Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning