Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are durable
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are durable |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEwsHPC3g1wkavbL6p0YhpqaaGMasFkk8h2T2x1maYjv7Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are durable (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: backup tools ought to ensure created backups are
durable
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
On 3/28/16 11:03 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
That should work yeah. And given that we already use that check in other
places, it seems it should be perfectly safe. And as long as we only do
a WARNING and not abort if the fsync fails, we should be OK if people
intentionally store their backups on an fs that doesn't speak fsync (if
that exists), in which case I don't really think we even need a switch
to turn it off.
I'd even go so far as spitting out a warning any time we can't fsync (maybe that's what you're suggesting?)
That is pretty much what I was suggesting, yes.
Though we might want to consolidate them in for example pg_basebackup -Fp and pg_dump -Fd into something like "failed to fsync <n> files".
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: