Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes
Date: 2010-12-07 23:11:22
Message-ID: 548.1291763482@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> On 12/7/10 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Another point here is that it's not clear why we're selecting a
>> known-to-be-insecure default on OS X (where in fact all methods except
>> fsync_writethrough fail to push data to disk). We've been around on
>> that before, of course, and maybe now is not the time to change it.

> Because nobody sane uses OSX on the server?

Some of us would make the same remark about Windows. But we go out of
our way to provide a safe default on that platform anyhow.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-12-07 23:21:50 Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-12-07 23:00:57 Re: unlogged tables