Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)
Date: 2018-05-01 01:38:03
Message-ID: CAMsr+YGsvYmJ0aRuV7zNf-rmi53bzFF8yrsgrNBm9yOY8FYD0g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1 May 2018 at 00:09, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> It's not. Only SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WAIT_{BEFORE,AFTER} eat errors. Which
> seems sensible, because they could be considered data integrity
> operations.

Ah, I misread that. Thankyou.

>> I'm very suspicious about the safety of the msync() path too.
>
> That seems justified however:

I'll add EIO tests there.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2018-05-01 01:53:59 Re: FOR EACH ROW triggers on partitioned tables
Previous Message Юрий Соколов 2018-05-01 01:31:26 Re: [HACKERS] Clock with Adaptive Replacement