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

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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: 2018-04-03 23:59:27
Message-ID: CAEepm=3ZTttwB+mSX1TwDR5tVVWw8hrxOvW_KHRJm1gh6bKQ2g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Interestingly, there don't seem to be many operating systems that can
> report ENOSPC from fsync(), based on a quick scan through some
> documentation:
>
> POSIX, AIX, HP-UX, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD: no
> Illumos/Solaris, Linux, macOS: yes

Oops, reading comprehension fail. POSIX yes (since issue 5), via the
note that read() and write()'s error conditions can also be returned.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2018-04-04 00:26:58 Re: open/lseek overhead with many partitions (including with "faster partitioning pruning")
Previous Message David Rowley 2018-04-03 23:22:13 Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning