Re: 9.6 and fsync=off

On 2016-04-28 21:32:37 +0200, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 27 April 2016 at 17:04, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 27 April 2016 at 21:44, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> >> Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> >> > +1 (Abhijit's wording with data loss changed to data corruption)
> >>
> >> I'd suggest something like
> >>
> >> #fsync = on                             # flush data to disk for crash
> >> safety
> >>                                         # (turning this off can cause
> >>                                         # unrecoverable data corruption!)
> >>
> >>
> > Looks good.
> >
> > The docs on fsync are already good, it's just a matter of making people
> > think twice and actually look at them.
> >
> 
> If fsync=off and you turn it on, does it fsync anything at that point?
> 
> Or does it mean only that future fsyncs will occur?

Abhijit had a patch implementing automatically running fsync whenever
reenabled IIRC. Abhijit?

Andres