Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations?
Date
Msg-id 559C30F2.3000703@iki.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations?  ("Graeme B. Bell" <graeme.bell@nibio.no>)
List pgsql-performance
On 07/07/2015 10:59 PM, Graeme B. Bell wrote:
> Cache flushing isn't an atomic operation though. Even if the ordering
> is right, you are likely to have a partial fsync on the disk when the
> lights go out - isn't your FS still corrupt?

If the filesystem is worth its salt, no. Journaling filesystems for
example rely on the journal to work around that problem, and there are
other mechanisms.

PostgreSQL has exactly the same problem and uses the WAL to solve it.

- Heikki



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Graeme B. Bell"
Date:
Subject: Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations?
Next
From: "Graeme B. Bell"
Date:
Subject: Re: Hmmm... why does pl/pgsql code parallelise so badly when queries parallelise fine? Anyone else seen this?