On Thursday, April 28, 2016, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 27 April 2016 at 17:04, Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cr...@2ndquadrant.com');>> wrote: > >> On 27 April 2016 at 21:44, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','t...@sss.pgh.pa.us');>> wrote: >> >>> Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','p...@2ndquadrant.com');>> writes: >>> > +1 (Abhijit's wording with data loss changed to data corruption) >>> >>> I'd suggest something like >>> >>> #fsync = on # flush data to disk for crash >>> safety >>> # (turning this off can cause >>> # unrecoverable data corruption!) >>> >>> >> Looks good. >> >> The docs on fsync are already good, it's just a matter of making people >> think twice and actually look at them. >> > > If fsync=off and you turn it on, does it fsync anything at that point? > > Or does it mean only that future fsyncs will occur? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/runtime-config-wal.html 4th paragraph in the fsync section. David J.
