On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Ron Mayer
wrote:
> Naomi Walker wrote:
>> Other than disaster tests, how would I know if I have an system that
>> lies about fsync?
>
> Well, the linux kernel tries to detect it on bootup and
> will give messages like this:
> %dmesg | grep 'disabling barriers'
>
Naomi Walker wrote:
> Other than disaster tests, how would I know if I have an system that
> lies about fsync?
Well, the linux kernel tries to detect it on bootup and
will give messages like this:
%dmesg | grep 'disabling barriers'
JBD: barrier-based sync failed on md1 - disabling barriers
J
Other than disaster tests, how would I know if I have an system that
lies about fsync?
We preach this again and again. PostgreSQL can only survive a power
outage type failure ONLY if the hardware / OS / filesystem don't lie
about fsync. If they do, all bets are off, and this kind of failure
On Samstag 21 Februar 2009 Scott Marlowe wrote:
> We preach this again and again. PostgreSQL can only survive a power
> outage type failure ONLY if the hardware / OS / filesystem don't lie
> about fsync. If they do, all bets are off, and this kind of failure
> means you should really failover to
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Michael Monnerie
wrote:
> I managed to recover the data that was still readable. About 650
> messageblock entries got lost. What makes me nervous a bit is that
> postgres kept running despite (partially) being destroyed. It should
> really have shutdown itself afte
I managed to recover the data that was still readable. About 650
messageblock entries got lost. What makes me nervous a bit is that
postgres kept running despite (partially) being destroyed. It should
really have shutdown itself after the first problem was found. That
database is for mails, and
