From: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
To: Pierre C <lists@peufeu.com>
Cc: Tadipathri Raghu <traghu.dba@gmail.com>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Why Wal_buffer is 64KB
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:00:38 -0600
Message-ID: <dcc563d11003260700i71f4c974o27b3f1db2f9ef609@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <op.u96ge7lfeorkce@localhost>
References: <645d9d71003250801o246439a0j93c7b568786e98de@mail.gmail.com>
<3073cc9b1003251015x590e962ata59dadbb58b42ce5@mail.gmail.com>
<op.u94yaoixeorkce@localhost>
<645d9d71003252019u6f01a513x7876c1a97b448dea@mail.gmail.com>
<op.u96ge7lfeorkce@localhost>
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Pierre C <lists@peufeu.com> wrote:
>
>> After fsync/syncronous_commit off
>
> Do not use fsync off, it is not safe. Who cares about the performance of
> fsync=off, when in practice you'd never use it with real data.
> synchronnous_commit=off is fine for some applications, though.
There are situations where it's ok, when all the data are
reproduceable from other sources, etc. for instance I have a
reporting server that is a slony slave that runs with fsync off. If
it does crash and I can recreate the node in an hour or so and be back
online. With fsync off the machine is too slow to do its job, and
it's not the primary repo of the real data, so it's ok there.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: scott.marlowe@gmail.com, lists@peufeu.com, traghu.dba@gmail.com, jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec
Subject: Re: Why Wal_buffer is 64KB
In-Reply-To: <dcc563d11003260700i71f4c974o27b3f1db2f9ef609@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox