Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: andrew(at)supernews(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method
Date: 2005-08-10 03:01:36
Message-ID: 21740.1123642896@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com> writes:
>> If a SCSI drive reports write complete when it hasn't actually put the
>> bits on the platter yet, then it's simply broken.

> I guess you haven't read the spec much, then.

[ shrug... ] I have seen that spec before: I was making a living by
implementing SCSI device drivers in the mid-80's. I think that anyone
who uses WCE in place of tagged command queueing is not someone whose
code I would care to rely on for mission-critical applications. TCQ
is a design that just works; WCE is someone's attempt to emulate all
the worst features of IDE.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-08-10 03:05:43 Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends
Previous Message Andrew - Supernews 2005-08-10 01:09:32 Re: Simplifying wal_sync_method