Re: fsync reliability

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> The traditional standard is that the filesystem is supposed to take
>> care of its own metadata, and even Linux filesystems have pretty much
>> figured that out.  I don't really see a need for us to be nursemaiding
>> the filesystem.  At most there's a documentation issue here, ie, we
>> ought to be more explicit about which filesystems and which mount
>> options we recommend.
>
> I think it would be illuminating to shine upon this conversation the
> light of some actual facts, as to whether or not this can be
> demonstrated to be broken on systems people actually use, and to what
> extent it can be mitigated by the sorts of configuration choices you
> mention.  Neither Simon's comments nor yours give me any clear feeling
> as to how likely this is to cause problems for real users, nor how
> easily those problems can be mitigated.

If you have some actual facts yourself, add them. Or listen for people that do.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services