Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2BDD634B85 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:58:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82355-02-6 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 19:58:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D63BE633BF6 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:57:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o4AJvgX7016371; Mon, 10 May 2010 15:57:42 -0400 (EDT) To: "Kevin Grittner" cc: jd@commandprompt.com, "Greg Stark" , "Robert Haas" , "Bruce Momjian" , "Michael Tharp" , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, "Craig Ringer" Subject: Re: no universally correct setting for fsync In-reply-to: <4BE8118502000025000314CB@gw.wicourts.gov> References: <4BE81CA1.4080201@partiallystapled.com> <201005101512.o4AFCZS27089@momjian.us> <4BE7E62C02000025000314B7@gw.wicourts.gov> <1273516977.8624.18.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com> <4BE8118502000025000314CB@gw.wicourts.gov> Comments: In-reply-to "Kevin Grittner" message dated "Mon, 10 May 2010 14:00:37 -0500" Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 15:57:42 -0400 Message-ID: <16370.1273521462@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201005/479 X-Sequence-Number: 162142 "Kevin Grittner" writes: > Perhaps Josh's language for fsync could be modified to work here > (we're now talking about full_page_writes, for anyone who's lost > track): > | it is only advisable to turn off fsync if you can easily recreate > | your entire database from external data. > That covers bulk loads to an empty or just-backed-up database and > entirely redundant databases. Saying it should never be turned off > would tend to make one wonder why we have the setting at all. +1. Perhaps for both of them, we should specify that the intended use-case is for improving performance during initial database load and similar cases. regards, tom lane