Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are durable

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: Raw Message | Whole Thread | 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/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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