| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | maillists0(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL pg-general List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Replication and fsync |
| Date: | 2013-10-24 13:04:45 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwGn0AtyXgQLcrW6VVa1ftDyTqonKB1seg6xbAas1P2r0Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:39 AM, <maillists0(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Newb question.
>
> I'm running 9.1 with a slave using streaming replication. A coworker wants
> to turn off fsync on the master and insists that the slave will still be in
> a usable state if there is a failure on the master. We all know that turning
> off fsync is a bad idea, but I was under the impression that the fsync
> setting would be replicated to the slave, making it useless as a backup in
> this scenario.
No. The setting of fsync in the master is not replicated to the standby.
> Am I wrong? If I'm wrong, is there still danger to the slave
> in this kind of setup?
No, I think.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alban Hertroys | 2013-10-24 13:42:31 | Re: Replication and fsync |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2013-10-24 12:07:36 | Re: GIN fast update technique and work_mem |