Hi,
On 2015-12-12 22:14:13 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> this is the second improvement proposed in the thread [1] about ext4 data
> loss issue. It adds another field to control file, tracking the last known
> WAL segment. This does not eliminate the data loss, just the silent part of
> it when the last segment gets lost (due to forgetting the rename, deleting
> it by mistake or whatever). The patch makes sure the cluster refuses to
> start if that happens.
Uh, that's fairly expensive. In many cases it'll significantly increase
the number of fsyncs. I've a bit of a hard time believing this'll be
worthwhile. Additionally this doesn't seem to take WAL replay into
account?
Andres
