From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta(at)wp(dot)pl> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Background fsck |
Date: | 2011-04-06 22:48:22 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTim3SY4-P1xzxxfjB9BpvARfWd-Awg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta(at)wp(dot)pl> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I saw some recommendations from people on the net not to use background fsck
> when running PostgreSQL on FreeBSD. As I recall, these opinions were just
> thoughts of people which they shared with the community, following their bad
> experience caused by using background fsck. So, not coming any deeper with
> underatanding why not, I use that as a clear recommendation for myself and
> keep background fsck turned off on all my machines, regardless how much
> faster a server could come up after a crash.
>
> But waiting so much time (like now) during foreground fsck of a large data
> filesystem after unclean shutdown, makes me to come to this group to ask
> whether I really need to avoid background fsck on a PostgreSQL machine?
> Could I hear your opinions?
Shouldn't a journaling file system just come back up almost immediately?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ireneusz Pluta | 2011-04-06 22:59:08 | Re: Background fsck |
Previous Message | Ireneusz Pluta | 2011-04-06 22:33:35 | Background fsck |