Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch to improve reliability of postgresql on linux nfs

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: "ktm(at)rice(dot)edu" <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, George Barnett <gbarnett(at)atlassian(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch to improve reliability of postgresql on linux nfs
Date: 2011-09-12 14:37:35
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> wrote:
> Really, it's not *that* hard to put a retry loop around "read" and "write".

+1.  I don't see what we're gaining by digging in our heels on this
one.  Retry loops around read() and write() are pretty routine, and I
wouldn't like to bet this is the only case where not having them could
cause an unnecessary failure.

Now, that having been said, I *really* think we could use some better
documentation on which mount options we believe to be safe, and not
just for NFS.  Right now we have practically nothing.

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-09-12 15:05:02
Subject: Re: Alpha 1 for 9.2
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-09-12 14:31:23
Subject: Re: [REVIEW] prepare plans of embedded sql on function start

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group