| From: | Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Initdb --data-checksums by default |
| Date: | 2016-04-20 09:27:56 |
| Message-ID: | VisenaEmail.1d.9f4d851f2b3c67ad.15432fae09b@tc7-visena |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
På onsdag 20. april 2016 kl. 11:22:33, skrev Alex Ignatov <
a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru <mailto:a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>>:
[snip] Why do you think that common pg-users doesn't care about their data?
Did I say that?
Also why do we have wal_level=minimal fsync=on and other stuff?
To make certain garantees that data is by default durable.
What I'm saying is that everything is a compromise, cost/benefit. The universe
might explode tomorrow but the chances are slim, so no use preparing for it.
Those caring enough probably use checksums, battery-packed RAID etc.
-- Andreas Joseph Krogh
CTO / Partner - Visena AS
Mobile: +47 909 56 963
andreas(at)visena(dot)com <mailto:andreas(at)visena(dot)com>
www.visena.com <https://www.visena.com>
<https://www.visena.com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jinhua Luo | 2016-04-20 11:08:44 | How does postgresql jdbc driver implement prepared batch? |
| Previous Message | Alex Ignatov | 2016-04-20 09:22:33 | Re: Initdb --data-checksums by default |