Re: Can we trust fsync?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Can we trust fsync?
Date: 2013-11-23 00:10:40
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSXatTQpVfaEqMG4uk2m4Qg0FN22DJUYbMCK6ZFpmLYQg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> The program is diskchecker:
>>
>> http://brad.livejournal.com/2116715.html
>>
>> I got the author to re-host the source code on github a few years ago.
>
> It might be worth re-implementing this for -contrib. The fact that we
> mention diskchecker.pl in the docs, and it is a pretty obscure Perl
> script on some guy's personal website doesn't inspire much confidence.
Yes, having that in contrib would be useful. Those would bring a plus
when testing disks for Postgres.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2013-11-23 00:25:57 Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency
Previous Message Greg Stark 2013-11-22 23:32:39 Re: Building on S390