Richard Troy wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
(You know, of course, that my opinion is that no sane person would run a
production database on Windows in the first place. So the data-loss
risk to me seems less of a problem than the unexpected-failures problem.
It's not like there aren't a ton of other data-loss scenarios in that OS
that we can't do anything about...)
PLEASE OH PLEASE document every f-ing one of them! (And I don't mean
document Windows issues as comments in the source code. Best would be in
the official documentation/on a web page.) On occasion, I could *really*
use such a list! (If such already exists, please point me at it!)
Thing is, Tom, not everybody has the same level of information you have on
Please don't. At least not on the PostgreSQL web site nor in the docs.
And no, I don't run my production servers on Windows either.
For good or ill, we made a decision years ago to do a proper Windows
port. I think that it's actually worked out reasonably well. All
operating systems have warts. Not long ago I tended to advise people not
to run mission critical Postgresql on Linux unless they were *very*
careful, due to the over-commit issue.
In fact, I don't trust any OS. I use dumps and backups and replication
to protect myself from them all.
In the present instance, the data loss risk is largely theoretical, as I
understand it, as we don't expect a genuine EACCESS error.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster