Re: pg_ctl reload - is it safe?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl reload - is it safe?
Date: 2003-10-14 20:02:48
Message-ID: 200310142002.h9EK2m725847@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

wscott.marlowe wrote:
> > If you use "intr" then this type of thing can happen. Lots of programs assume
> > the unix semantics for disk accesses. You can get all kinds of bugs when
> > they're violated.
> >
> > If you use "soft" then the consequences can be much much worse. If your
> > fileserver were to reboot you could silently lose disk writes corrupting your
> > database.
>
> What if the WAL was local on disk, and the data was going to nfs storage,
> would that be safe, or saferer? :-)

Not sure --- we do a sync() on the entire machine before recycling the WAL logs.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2003-10-14 20:13:01 Re: postgres --help-config
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-10-14 20:01:32 Re: fix for strict-alias warnings