| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal for 9.1: WAL streaming from WAL buffers |
| Date: | 2010-07-07 22:44:08 |
| Message-ID: | 4C350338.8050501@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/6/10 4:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> To recap the previous discussion on this thread, we ended up changing
> the behavior of 9.0 so that it only sends WAL which has been written
> to the OS *and flushed*, because sending unflushed WAL to the standby
> is unsafe. The standby can get ahead of the master while still
> believing that the databases are in sync, due to the fact that after
> an SR reconnect we rewind to the start of the current WAL segment.
> This results in a silently corrupt standby database.
What was the final decision on behavior if fsync=off?
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-07-07 22:48:23 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and comments to say bytes not kilobytes. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-07-07 21:31:52 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add note that using PL/Python 2 and 3 in the same session will |