Re: 9.6 and fsync=off - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: 9.6 and fsync=off
Date
Msg-id 20364.1462199564@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.6 and fsync=off  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2 May 2016 at 22:07, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I also think that it would be a swell idea to detect whether a system
>> has ever crashed with fsync=off, and do something about that, like
>> maybe bleat on every subsequent startup for the lifetime of the
>> cluster.

> Yes. Very, very yes.

+1 for tracking this in pg_control (maybe even with a counter, not
just a flag).  I'm less convinced that we need to bleat on every
subsequent startup though --- that seems like just nagging.
Having the info available from pg_controldata seems sufficient for
forensics.

The timestamp ideas aren't bad either.

BTW, how would this work in a standby server?
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Accidentally parallel unsafe functions