| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: Is pg_control file crashsafe? |
| Date: | 2016-05-05 21:49:24 |
| Message-ID: | 15782.1462484964@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> One thing we could do without much worry of being less reliable would be to
> keep two copies of pg_control. Write one, fsync, then write to the other
> and fsync that one.
Hmm, interesting thought. Without knowing more about the filesystem
problem that the OP had, it's hard to tell whether this would have saved
us; but in principle it sounds like it would be more reliable.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stas Kelvich | 2016-05-05 22:25:08 | Re: Naming of new tsvector functions |
| Previous Message | Gavin Flower | 2016-05-05 21:46:42 | Re: Naming of new tsvector functions |