Re: initdb crash
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: initdb crash |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE34BE0B@algol.sollentuna.se обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | initdb crash (nitrogenycs@web.de) |
Ответы |
Re: initdb crash
|
Список | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
> From: Deblauwe Gino [mailto:De_Spike@Pandora.Be] > > This isn't just convenience, NTFS (Never The Same Filesystem) > means not running between multiple platforms. Notice that we don't support 9x anyway. We only support NT based systems, and they all support NTFS. > And a crashed > NTFS is harder to recover than a crashed FAT32. All I want > to say is that they both have their good sides AND their bad sides. > If you don't work with multiple OS's on 1 system and a shared > partition between them the choice to make is definitely an > NTFS, but there are other situations. If they are both NT based, NTFS should not be a problem, or? > > This is Postgres. Our motto is "We care about your data". You would > > have to work really really hard to convince me that > convenience wins > > out over safety. On the basis on this, btw, why don't we reject things like ext2 on linux? Or any non-metadata-journalled FS (on any platforms)? Or at least emit a warning. If we can detect it at all (I guess that could be why). While not as bad as FAT for reliability, still not very good... //Magnus
В списке pgsql-hackers-win32 по дате отправления: