Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
From: "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2003-01-30T20:27:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] > Sent: 30 January 2003 15:56 > To: Hannu Krosing > Cc: Vince Vielhaber; Dave Page; Ron Mayer; > pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System > > > In the pull-the-plug case you have to worry about what is on > disk at any given instant and whether you can make all the > bits on disk consistent again. (And also about whether your > filesystem can perform the equivalent exercise for its own > metadata; which is why we are questioning Windows here. I've never (to my knowledge) lost any data following a powerfail or system crash on a system using NTFS - that has always seemed pretty solid to me. By comparison, I have lost data on ext2 filesystems on a couple of occasions. More info at: http://www.ntfs.com/data-integrity.htm http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/ntfs/relRec-c.html Obviously this goes out of the window is the user chooses to run on FAT/FAT32 partitions. I think that it should be made *very* clear in any future documentation that the user is strongly advised to use only NTFS filesystems. I realise this is not proof that it actually works of course... Regards, Dave.