On 2019-04-26 09:41, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Those options are Linux-specific -- maybe just say so?
committed with that change
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:17 PM Joe Conway wrote:
> On 4/24/19 4:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 2019-04-23 18:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> >>> On 2019-04-23 16:15, Joe Conway wrote:
> I don't think so. Not sure if you have an account at Red Hat, but this
>
On 4/24/19 4:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-04-23 18:53, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>>> On 2019-04-23 16:15, Joe Conway wrote:
I don't think so. Not sure if you have an account at Red Hat, but this
ticket covers it:
https://access.redhat.com/solutions/4819
Eisentraut
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 10:53:40 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v2] doc: Update section on NFS
---
doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml | 94 ++-
1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml
index 3
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 2019-04-23 16:15, Joe Conway wrote:
>> I don't think so. Not sure if you have an account at Red Hat, but this
>> ticket covers it:
>> https://access.redhat.com/solutions/48199
> That discusses the equally-named export options on the NFS server, not
> the mount option
On 2019-04-23 16:15, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 4/23/19 9:47 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 2019-04-23 14:31, Joe Conway wrote:
>>> Looks like you dropped the advice WRT the asynchronous mount option.
>>> Isn't that is still relevant?
>>
>> I don't think that advice was correct. An async mounted NF
On 4/23/19 9:47 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-04-23 14:31, Joe Conway wrote:
>> Looks like you dropped the advice WRT the asynchronous mount option.
>> Isn't that is still relevant?
>
> I don't think that advice was correct. An async mounted NFS file system
> will flush data on fsync, whi
On 2019-04-23 14:31, Joe Conway wrote:
> Looks like you dropped the advice WRT the asynchronous mount option.
> Isn't that is still relevant?
I don't think that advice was correct. An async mounted NFS file system
will flush data on fsync, which is what one wants.
--
Peter Eisentraut
On 2019-04-23 13:00, Martín Marqués wrote:
> Didn''t read the proposed patch, but would like to point out that I
> would also add that it has to be mounted without file attribute caching.
Why?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remo
On 4/23/19 6:10 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Attached is a patch that rewrites the section on NFS. The old section
> was ancient and didn't seem very helpful.
>
> AFAIK, the only strict requirement for using NFS with PostgreSQL is the
> hard mount. Anything else we should mention?
>
> I also r
El 23/4/19 a las 07:10, Peter Eisentraut escribió:
> Attached is a patch that rewrites the section on NFS. The old section
> was ancient and didn't seem very helpful.
>
> AFAIK, the only strict requirement for using NFS with PostgreSQL is the
> hard mount. Anything else we should mention?
Didn'
ices
From 6b9430b395997955be718244d0061eceb1319a9e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:03:57 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] doc: Update section on NFS
---
doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml | 71 ++-
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
d
12 matches
Mail list logo
