Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 05:18:28PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 10:56:58PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > 2. remove fsync parameter
> > >
> > > Why? Wouldn't fsync=off still speed up checkpoints? ISTM you'd still
> > > want this for things like database restores.
> >
> > I think we will remove fsync in favor of the new delay, and allow -1 to
> > be the same behavior as fsync off.
>
> Well, presumably we'd still allow fsync for some number of versions...
No.
> Actually, I don't know that combining both settings is a wise move. The
> delay should still provide crash protection, whereas with fsync=off
> you've got absolutely no protection from anything. That's a huge
> difference, and one that IMHO warrants a separate setting (and a big,
> fat WARNING in the comment for that setting).
Yes, it needs a warning, or perhaps we just tell people to set it to
something high and that is all they can do.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
