Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 04:32:42PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> > Given that this could result in data loss, if this was to be done I'd
> > very much want to see a way to disable it in a production environment.
>
> Production environments are the same ones that won't be happy with
> random checkpoint failures, either.

Maybe I'm not understanding what happens in a checkpoint failure, but
I'd rather have my pg_xlog fill up (hopefully with a lot af WARNINGS
thrown before-hand) and face a long recovery than lose data...

> If we can't find a way to positively identify the deleted-file failures
> then I think we've got to do something like this.
>
> (You know, of course, that my opinion is that no sane person would run a
> production database on Windows in the first place. So the data-loss
> risk to me seems less of a problem than the unexpected-failures problem.
> It's not like there aren't a ton of other data-loss scenarios in that OS
> that we can't do anything about...)

Yeah, and I share your opinion. Unfortunately, a lot of others do not.
:(

It would be useful if we had a page somewhere that explained in detail
what these data-loss issues were and why they're out of our control. At
least then people would (or could...) understand why production +
Windows == BadIdea.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)