On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 04:32:42PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Given that this could result in data loss, if this was to be done I'd > > very much want to see a way to disable it in a production environment. > > Production environments are the same ones that won't be happy with > random checkpoint failures, either.
Maybe I'm not understanding what happens in a checkpoint failure, but I'd rather have my pg_xlog fill up (hopefully with a lot af WARNINGS thrown before-hand) and face a long recovery than lose data... > If we can't find a way to positively identify the deleted-file failures > then I think we've got to do something like this. > > (You know, of course, that my opinion is that no sane person would run a > production database on Windows in the first place. So the data-loss > risk to me seems less of a problem than the unexpected-failures problem. > It's not like there aren't a ton of other data-loss scenarios in that OS > that we can't do anything about...) Yeah, and I share your opinion. Unfortunately, a lot of others do not. :( It would be useful if we had a page somewhere that explained in detail what these data-loss issues were and why they're out of our control. At least then people would (or could...) understand why production + Windows == BadIdea. -- Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
