zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. gmueck+(OP)[view] [source] 2019-05-27 16:48:04
What possibilities are there for a write to fail that the database server cannot react to? I am under the impression that a write error like this would be reported as a failure to run the statement and the application is responsible for handling that.
replies(1): >>KirinD+n6
2. KirinD+n6[view] [source] 2019-05-27 17:35:04
>>gmueck+(OP)
The box turning off, the disk interface failing, and/or the link to the database failing in mid instruction.

Same as SQS.

replies(3): >>xyzzy_+kj >>z3t4+nm >>mcquee+ar
◧◩
3. xyzzy_+kj[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-27 19:22:29
>>KirinD+n6
All of those would result in a write failure from the application's perspective, which is fine, and must be accounted for regardless (e.g. retry, two phase commit, log an error, whatever).
◧◩
4. z3t4+nm[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-27 19:53:24
>>KirinD+n6
Also the FS might report the data as written but its actually in a write cache and will be lost if the plug is pulled.
replies(1): >>gmueck+Wv
◧◩
5. mcquee+ar[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-27 20:44:33
>>KirinD+n6
But you have to explicitly delete the message from SQS, right? You'd only delete after confirming you processed the message, right? So if you die mid-instruction in processing a message, the message just re-appears in the SQS queue after the visibility timeout.
replies(1): >>KirinD+yJ
◧◩◪
6. gmueck+Wv[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-27 21:31:53
>>z3t4+nm
Not an issue if you follow th e recommendations in the PostgeSQL documentation. The way to comfigure write caches is described there.
◧◩◪
7. KirinD+yJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-28 00:34:39
>>mcquee+ar
That's a feature, and one your have to replicate in your postgres queue.
[go to top]