| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'thomas(at)pgsql(dot)com'" <thomas(at)pgsql(dot)com>, Ryan Kirkpatrick <pgsql(at)rkirkpat(dot)net>, "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | AW: Recovery of PGSQL after system crash failing!!! |
| Date: | 2001-02-14 08:47:22 |
| Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA6879633681F9@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> It removes the need to disable fsync to get best performance!
-F performance is still better, only the difference is not so big as before.
> Since there is a fundamental recovery problem if the WAL file
> disappears, then perhaps we should have a workaround which can ignore
> the requirement for that file on startup? Or maybe we do already?
> Vadim??
This was discussed, but iirc not yet implemented.
> Also, could the "-F" option be disabled now that WAL is enabled? Or is
> there still some reason to encourage/allow folks to use it?
I use it, since I restore after a system crash (which never happens).
I think all that is probably missing in -F mode is probably 2-3 fsyncs
during checkpoint. One for the xlog, and one for pg_control (maybe also pg_log).
All other fsyncs are only to not buffer transactions.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vadim Mikheev | 2001-02-14 09:40:52 | Re: Recovery of PGSQL after system crash failing!!! |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2001-02-14 08:45:45 | Re: [ODBC] ODBC <6.4 protocol |