On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The traditional standard is that the filesystem is supposed to take
> care of its own metadata, and even Linux filesystems have pretty much
> figured that out. I don't really see a need for us to be nursemaiding
> the filesystem. At most there's a documentation issue here, ie,
I'm surprised by your response. If we've not documented something that
turns out to be essential to reliability of production databases, then
our users have a problem.
If our users have a data loss problem, my understanding was that we fixed it.
As it turns out, I've never personally advised anyone to use a
non-journalled filesystem, so my hands are clean in this. But it is
something we can fix, if we chose.
> we
> ought to be more explicit about which filesystems and which mount
> options we recommend.
Please be explicit then. What should the docs have said? I will update them.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services