Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes

On 12/07/2010 08:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dropping open_datasync as the first-choice default is something we have
> to back-patch, but I'm less sure about it being a good idea to
> back-patch the rearrangement of O_DIRECT management. Somebody who'd
> explicitly specified open_sync or open_datasync as wal_sync_method
> would find its behavior changing under him, which might be bad.

I agree for the backpatch that we should just swap to fdatasync as
default, and should not attempt to add the extra options.

In addition to the concerns above, adding new GUCS values in an update
release is something we should only do if required for a critical
security or data-loss bug. And this is neither.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com