On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:08:25AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> That can definitly be debated. Properly maintaned on proper hardware,
> it's quite reliable these days.
> Most filesystem corruptions that happen on windows are because people
> enable write caching on drives without battery backup. The same issue
> we're facing here, it's *not* a problem in the fs, it's a problem in the
> admin. Sure, there are lots of things that could be better with ntfs,
> but I would definitly not call it unreliable.
People enable? Isn't it the default?
> > 3. The probability of mediocre hardware is higher.
>
> I would say it's actually *lower*. If you look in the average
> datacenter, I bet you'll find a lot more linux boxes running on
> built-at-home-with-the-cheapest-parts boxes. Whereas your windows boxes
> will run on HP or IBM or whatever real server-grade hardware.
>
> I don't know anybody who claims to run a professional business who uses
> IDE drives in a Windows server, for example. I know several who run
> linux or freebsd on it.
The professional probably tests it on his own desktop. I don't
think PostgreSQL reaches the data center before passing the run
on desktop.
> > Regular POSIX:
> > 1. We can't write through cache.
> > 2. We have good OS with good filesystem (probably even
> > journaled).
>
> NTFS is journaled, BTW. And I've seen a lot more corruption on ext2,
> extr3 or reiser than I'ev seen on NTFS in my datacenter - and I have
> about 5 times more Windows server than linux...
> Granted other unixen might be more stable, I don't run any of those..
>
> > 3. The probably of mediocre hardware is lower.
>
> See above.
Ok, comparing impressions is not productive.
> > Why shouldn't we offer reliable option to win32?
>
> *we do offer a reliabel option*.
> Same as on POSIX, we don't enable it by default for *non-server
> hardware*.
What do you mean here? AFAIK we try to be reliable on POSIX too.
> > Options:
> >
> > - Win32 guy complains that PG is bit slow.
> > We tell him to RTFM.
>
> What most often happens here is:
> Win32 guy notices PG is very slow, changes to mysql or mssql.
But lost database is no problem?
--
marko
