Tom Lane wrote: > "Mattias Kregert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [ misguided analysis ] > > > Journalling FS will fix the FS problems, so the files are ok. > > PG journal will fix the PG problems so the tables will be ok. > > Only if the journal is all down to disk before the crash. > > The fundamental problem with fsync off is that it's likely to violate > the WAL principle (write journal entry before data entry it describes). > If you then crash, you have data entries that correspond to transactions > that should not have been committed (because WAL replay won't guarantee > recovering all of the transaction's effects). In other words, corrupt > data. > > If we had a less costly way of guaranteeing write order than fsync, we'd > use it, but there is no other portable method.
Uh oh... i thought the journal was always synced, and that the fsync option only affected table writes... :( If I turn fsync on and then pull the power cord while a number of clients are doing lots of inserts/updates and stuff, will the fsync then guarantee that no data will be lost or corrupted? /* m */ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org