From: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgresql logging questions |
Date: | 2012-01-30 20:29:20 |
Message-ID: | 4F26FDA0.6020906@hogranch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 01/30/12 12:14 PM, Heine Ferreira wrote:
>
> Most RDBMS's log all sql changes.
> When the server crashes or a power failure occurs and the server comes
> back up
> the rdbms rolls back to the nearest checkpoint and does a roll forward
> from the log.
>
> Does Postgres also do this?
>
yes, although it uses a somewhat different technique than you describe.
>
> If so is Postgres logging any beter than other databases?
'better' is subjective without defined metrics.
> How good is Postgres at surviving power failures?
> This is of course assuming that you don't have a ups.
UPS's fail too :)
assuming your file system and storage hardware are robust and doesn't do
things like lie about write caching, postgres is very good about
recovery to the last committed transaction.
--
john r pierce N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Angelico | 2012-01-30 21:17:57 | Re: Lock/deadlock issues with priority queue in Postgres - possible VACUUM conflicts |
Previous Message | Heine Ferreira | 2012-01-30 20:14:08 | Postgresql logging questions |