| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,"Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Michael Tharp" <gxti(at)partiallystapled(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Craig Ringer" <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Subject: | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Date: | 2010-05-10 19:00:37 |
| Message-ID: | 4BE8118502000025000314CB@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> The answer to this is:
>
> PostgreSQL.org recommends that this setting be left on at all
> times. Turning it off, may lead to data corruption.
>
> Anything else is circumstantial and based on knowledge and facts
> we don't have about environmental factors.
Perhaps Josh's language for fsync could be modified to work here
(we're now talking about full_page_writes, for anyone who's lost
track):
| it is only advisable to turn off fsync if you can easily recreate
| your entire database from external data.
That covers bulk loads to an empty or just-backed-up database and
entirely redundant databases. Saying it should never be turned off
would tend to make one wonder why we have the setting at all.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-10 19:57:42 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-05-10 18:42:57 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-10 19:57:42 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-05-10 18:42:57 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |