Re: Fairly serious bug induced by latest guc enum changes

Magnus Hagander <magnus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> Or are you talking about changing the variable "fsync"? If so, doesn't
> "fsync=off" also change the behavior of other parts of the code, so it's
> not just WAL, which means it'd be pretty unsafe *anyway* unless you
> actually "sync" the disks, and not just fsync?

No, because the other uses of it are controlling whether to issue
fsync() calls dynamically.  The use in get_sync_bit is the only one
that sets persistent state.  In fact md.c goes out of its way to ensure
that changing fsync on the fly behaves as expected.

			regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers