Re: Question about linux filesystem and psql
От | Doug McNaught |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Question about linux filesystem and psql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8765863igh.fsf@asmodeus.mcnaught.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Question about linux filesystem and psql (Marcus Wegner <wegner3000@hotmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Marcus Wegner <wegner3000@hotmail.com> writes: > Is it possible to keep data safe with linux and psql after crash? > > The short description of the scenario is: > -> writing data with psql (using transactions), store process completed > -> user hits the reset button or kernel crashes (whatever left the filesystem > unsynced) > -> filesystem is xfs or reiserfs > -> reboot causes some blocks filled with zero (journalling feature discussed > on lkml) of last accessed files from some applications The quesiton here is: do these filesystems lie about fsync()? Or do they just corrupt files that were written but not synced before the crash? I think it's the latter--lying about fsync() is a pretty major bug, and I don't recall that being claimed on LKML. Given this, PG should be in good shape--it fsyncs() the WAL file before reporting transaction success, so it should be able to recover committed transactions. > My questions are: > Is there any solution that psql keeps the database intact (already written > data)? > Is there an option for psql or filesystem (like reiserfs data=ordered) which > should be used (maybe backup database) You should always back up your data. :) You might also consider ext3 with data=writeback. As long as the WAL files are in sync and the filesystem metadata is journaled, PG can recover from crashes just fine (barring actual hardware failure). -Doug -- Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees. --T. J. Jackson, 1863
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: