| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are durable |
| Date: | 2016-03-29 08:06:20 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEwsHPC3g1wkavbL6p0YhpqaaGMasFkk8h2T2x1maYjv7Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> On 3/28/16 11:03 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>>
>> That should work yeah. And given that we already use that check in other
>> places, it seems it should be perfectly safe. And as long as we only do
>> a WARNING and not abort if the fsync fails, we should be OK if people
>> intentionally store their backups on an fs that doesn't speak fsync (if
>> that exists), in which case I don't really think we even need a switch
>> to turn it off.
>>
>
> I'd even go so far as spitting out a warning any time we can't fsync
> (maybe that's what you're suggesting?)
That is pretty much what I was suggesting, yes.
Though we might want to consolidate them in for example pg_basebackup -Fp
and pg_dump -Fd into something like "failed to fsync <n> files".
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-03-29 08:12:29 | Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are durable |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-03-29 07:59:01 | Re: IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion |