On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 06:02:37PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 05:38:59PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Marko Kreen wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 03:56:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > > Currently, here are the options available for wal_sync_method:
> > > > >
> > > > > #wal_sync_method = fsync # the default varies across
> > > > > platforms:
> > > > > # fsync, fdatasync,
> > > > > fsync_writethrough,
> > > > > # open_sync, open_datasync
> > > >
> > > > On same topic:
> > > >
> > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2005-07/msg00811.php
> > > >
> > > > Why does win32 PostgreSQL allow data corruption by default?
> > >
> > > It behaves the same on Unix as Win32, and if you have battery-backed
> > > cache, you don't need writethrough, so we don't have it as default. I
> > > am going to write a section in the manual for 8.1 about these
> > > reliability issues.
> >
> > I think we should offer the reliable option by default, and mention the
> > fast option for those who have battery-backed cache in the manual.
>
> But only on Win32?
Yes, because that's the only place where that option works, right?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
"I dream about dreams about dreams", sang the nightingale
under the pale moon (Sandman)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
