Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question
Date
Msg-id 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE4769B0@algol.sollentuna.se
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-hackers
>> You may find that if you check this case again that the
>"usually no data
>> corruption" is actually "usually lost transactions but no
>corruption".
>
>That's a good point, but it seems difficult to be sure of the last
>reportedly-committed transaction in a powerfail situation.  Maybe if
>you drive the test from a client on another machine?

FYI, that's what I did. Test client ran across the network to the
server, so it could output on the console which transaction was last
reported commityted.

In a couple of cases, the server came up with a transaction the client
had *not* reported as committed. But I think that can be explained by
the commit message not reaching the client over the network before power
went out.

//Magnus


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ernst Herzberg
Date:
Subject: Re: Some download statistics
Next
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question