On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 10:08:30PM -0800, muteki muteki wrote:
> And you have pointed out my concern. Even though we have WAL
> enable, we have intentionally disabled both fsync and fdatasync
> inside the kernel because of other reasons. As long as there are
> ways I can eliminate database being corrupted (or correctly and
> automatically detected the corruption and drop the tables if
> necessary), that should satisfy my need.
Well, simple choice. If you don't use fsync or fdatasync then there are no
guarentees for your data. Simple as that. I guess you need to evaluate
exactly how much you value it...
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> (... have gone from d-i being barely usable even by its developers
> anywhere, to being about 20% done. Sweet. And the last 80% usually takes
> 20% of the time, too, right?) -- Anthony Towns, debian-devel-announce