"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 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.
>
> In this case, it was lost transactions, not data corruption.
> ...
> A couple of the latest transactions were gone, but the database came up
> in a consistent state, if a bit old.
That's interesting. It would be very interesting to know how reliably this is
true. It could potentially vary depending on the drive firmware.
I can't see any painless way to package up this kind of test for people to run
though. Powercycling machines repeatedly really isn't fun and takes a long
time. And testing this on vmware doesn't buy us anything.
--
greg
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
