Re: [HACKERS] Re: Recovery of PGSQL after system crash failing!!!

[Tom Lane]

Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, could the "-F" option be disabled now that WAL is enabled? Or is
> there still some reason to encourage/allow folks to use it?

I was the one who put it back in after Vadim turned it off ;-) ... and
I'll object to any attempt to remove the option.

I think that there's no longer any good reason for people to consider -F
in production use.  On the other hand, for development or debugging work
where you don't really *care* about powerfail survivability, I see no
reason to incur extra wear on your disk drives by forcing fsyncs.  My
drives only have so many seeks left in 'em, and I'd rather see those
seeks expended on writing source-code files than on fsyncs of test
databases.

                        regards, tom lane