Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations?
От | Graeme B. Bell |
---|---|
Тема | Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AB056B38-EC0F-46B6-90E6-0963604E0A9B@skogoglandskap.no обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Ответы |
Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations?
Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Yikes. I would not be able to sleep tonight if it were not for the BBU cache in front of these disks... diskchecker.pl consistently reported several examples of corruption post-power-loss (usually 10 - 30 ) on unprotected M500s/M550s,so I think it's pretty much open to debate what types of madness and corruption you'll find if you look closeenough. G On 07 Jul 2015, at 16:59, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: > > So it lies about fsync()... The next question is, does it nevertheless enforce the correct ordering of persisting fsync'ddata? If you write to file A and fsync it, then write to another file B and fsync it too, is it guaranteed that ifB is persisted, A is as well? Because if it isn't, you can end up with filesystem (or database) corruption anyway. > > - Heikki
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: