On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> wrote:
> On 3/28/16 11:03 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> That should work yeah. And given that we already use that check in other
>> places, it seems it should be perfectly safe. And as long as we only do
>> a WARNING and not abort if the fsync fails, we should be OK if people
>> intentionally store their backups on an fs that doesn't speak fsync (if
>> that exists), in which case I don't really think we even need a switch
>> to turn it off.
> I'd even go so far as spitting out a warning any time we can't fsync
> (maybe that's what you're suggesting?)
That is pretty much what I was suggesting, yes.
Though we might want to consolidate them in for example pg_basebackup -Fp
and pg_dump -Fd into something like "failed to fsync <n> files".