| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Michael Tharp" <gxti(at)partiallystapled(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Craig Ringer" <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Subject: | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Date: | 2010-05-10 15:55:40 |
| Message-ID: | 4BE7E62C02000025000314B7@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> "It might be safe" is a bit of a waffle. It would be nice if we
> could provide some more clear guidance as to whether it is or is
> not, or how someone could go about testing their hardware to find
> out.
I think that the issue is that you could have corruption if some,
but not all, disk sectors from a page were written from OS cache to
controller cache when a failure occurred. The window would be small
for a RAM-to-RAM write, but it wouldn't be entirely *safe* unless
there's some OS/driver environment where you could count on all the
sectors making it or none of them making it for every single page.
Does such an environment exist?
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2010-05-10 17:46:53 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-05-10 15:49:15 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2010-05-10 16:01:00 | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-05-10 15:49:15 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |