Re: Read consistency when using synchronous_commit=off - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ron
Subject Re: Read consistency when using synchronous_commit=off
Date
Msg-id 788bc40e-a378-11a3-8191-865b5bafe4aa@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Read consistency when using synchronous_commit=off  (pshadangi <pshadangi@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general

A crash-unsafe database is for data you don't care about.


On 1/16/19 2:27 AM, pshadangi wrote:
Thanks Ravi for the clarification, we will go ahead with "synchronous_commit=off".

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:47 AM Ravi Krishna <srkrishna@fastmail.com> wrote:
Sorry I misunderstood.  The term "read consistency" is generally used either in the context of isolation level or in the context of slaves.

We don't have standby instance, as I have mentioned we are using just one instance of postgres serving local clients running on the same machine, do you know in this case what is the behavior ?


You are good.  All transactions update buffer cache too, along with WAL buffer and hence other sessions can immediately see the changes. synchronous_commit=off will only reduce the fsync calls, which makes them less crash safe, but the database consistency is not compromised.
  


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: pshadangi
Date:
Subject: Re: Read consistency when using synchronous_commit=off
Next
From: Олег Самойлов
Date:
Subject: lost "left join"