| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christophe <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Maximum transaction rate |
| Date: | 2009-03-13 22:59:15 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10903131559n260a70d7wbb6082c4fb1a37c6@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Christophe <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:59 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>> Wait, actually a good BBU RAID controller will disable the cache on the
>> drives. So everything that is cached is already on the controller vs.
>> the drives itself.
>>
>> Or am I missing something?
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but a BBU controller moves the "safe point"
> from the platters to the controller, but it doesn't move it all the way into
> the OS.
>
> So, if the software calls fsync, but fsync doesn't actually push the data to
> the controller, you are still at risk... right?
Ding!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2009-03-14 03:32:14 | Re: [Pgpool-general] panic: index siblings mismatch |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-13 21:21:51 | Re: recatalog existing databases after re-build from source |