Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anthony Iliopoulos <ailiop(at)altatus(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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 23:37:42
Message-ID: 87po3di5vd.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Note: as I've brought up in another thread, it turns out that PG is not
handling fsync errors correctly even when the OS _does_ do the right
thing (discovered by testing on FreeBSD).

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2018-04-05 23:43:18 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2018-04-05 23:36:39 Re: Checkpoint not retrying failed fsync?