Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jaime Casanova
Тема Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around
Дата
Msg-id c2d9e70e050219112379204df4@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around  (lsunley@mb.sympatico.ca)
Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around  (pgsql@mohawksoft.com)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:35:31 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> pgsql@mohawksoft.com writes:
> > I think there should be a 100% no data loss fail safe.
> 
> Possibly we need to recalibrate our expectations here.  The current
> situation is that PostgreSQL will not lose data if:
> 
>        1. Your disk drive doesn't screw up (eg, lie about write complete,
>           or just plain die on you).
>        2. Your kernel and filesystem don't screw up.
>        3. You follow the instructions about routine vacuuming.
>        4. You don't hit any bugs that we don't know about.
> 
I'm not an expert but a happy user. My opinion is:
1)  there is nothing to do with #1 and #2. 
2)  #4 is not a big problem because of the velocity developers fix
those when a bug is found.

3) All databases has some type of maintenance routine, in informix for
example we have (update statistics, and there are others for oracle)
of course they are for performance reasons, but vacuum is too for that
and additionally give us the XID wraparound.
So, to have a maintenance routine in PostgreSQL is not bad. *Bad* is
to have a DBA(1) with no clue about the tool is using. Tools that do
to much are an incentive in hire *no clue* people.

(1) DBA: DataBase Administrator or DataBase Aniquilator???

regards,
Jaime Casanova


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Abhijit Menon-Sen
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: postgres crashing on a seemingly good query
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: postgres crashing on a seemingly good query