Re: [HACKERS] no universally correct setting for fsync - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] no universally correct setting for fsync
Date
Msg-id 4335.1273277612@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] no universally correct setting for fsync  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] no universally correct setting for fsync  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-docs
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> This is what I have to replace the current fsync entry in config.sgml.

s/unexpected shutdown/system crash/, perhaps.  The wording you have
suggests that a forced Postgres stoppage produces a problem, which it
doesn't.  It takes a failure at the OS level or below to cause a
problem.

> I believe that the note about needing fsync for Warm Standby to work
> correctly is true, but could someone verify it?

AFAIK that's nonsense.  The filesystem state that pg_standby could see
will be updated in any case; pg_standby has no direct access to the bits
on the platters, any more than Postgres does.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] no universally correct setting for fsync
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] no universally correct setting for fsync