"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> * Linux, with fsync (default), write-cache enabled: usually no data
> corruption, but two runs which had
Are you verifying that all the data that was committed was actually stored? Or
just verifying that the database works properly after rebooting?
I'm a bit surprised that the write-cache lead to a corrupt database, and not
merely lost transactions. I had the impression that drives still handled the
writes in the order received.
You may find that if you check this case again that the "usually no data
corruption" is actually "usually lost transactions but no corruption".
--
greg
