Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Oliver Jowett
Тема Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Дата
Msg-id 42CC7BF9.3060504@opencloud.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs wrote:

> I agree we *must* have the GUC, but we also *must* have a way for crash
> recovery to tell us for certain that it has definitely worked, not just
> maybe worked.

Doesn't the same argument apply to the existing fsync = off case? i.e.
we already have a case where we don't provide a crash-recovery guarantee.

-O


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Joshua D. Drake"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Следующее
От: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [INTERFACES] By Passed Domain Constraints