| From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Remove fsync ON/OFF as a visible option? | 
| Date: | 2015-03-21 16:26:18 | 
| Message-ID: | 20150321162618.GA28815@fetter.org | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:54:00AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > At the moment, one could look at our default postgresql.conf and the
> > "turns forced synchronization on or off" and think it's something akin
> > or somehow related to synchronous_commit (which is completely different,
> > but the options are right next to each other..).
> 
> > How about a big warning around fsync and make it more indepenent from
> > the options around it?
> 
> Yeah, the main SGML docs are reasonably clear about the risks of fsync,
> but postgresql.conf doesn't give you any hint that it's dangerous.  Now
> I'm not entirely sure that people who frob postgresql.conf without having
> read the docs can be saved from themselves, but we could do something
> like this:
> 
>  # - Settings -
>  
>  #wal_level = minimal			# minimal, archive, hot_standby, or logical
>  					# (change requires restart)
>  #fsync = on				# turns forced synchronization on or off
> +                                       # (fsync=off is dangerous, read the
> +                                       # (manual before using it)
I think this will help people who find themselves in that file with
few (or wrong) ideas of what this does.
>  #synchronous_commit = on		# synchronization level;
>  					# off, local, remote_write, or on
>  #wal_sync_method = fsync		# the default is the first option
>  					# supported by the operating system:
> 
> Also, I think the short description "turns forced synchronization on or
> off" could stand improvement; it really conveys zero information.  Maybe
> something like "force data to disk when committing"?
> 
> Also, whatever we do here should be reflected into the description strings
> in guc.c.
I don't suppose there's a way to have a single point of truth...
Cheers,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2015-03-21 16:42:01 | Re: Remove fsync ON/OFF as a visible option? | 
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-03-21 16:12:08 | Re: Future directions for inheritance-hierarchy statistics |