Re: initdb crash
Mark Kirkwood <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.win32 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I think this is not really an apples-to-apples comparison : - ext2 has persistent security permissions - ext2 is considerably more robust than fat Similar comments - but with more force in the second point - would apply for the various ufs implementations. regards Mark Magnus Hagander wrote: >On the basis on this, btw, why don't we reject things like ext2 on >linux? Or any non-metadata-journalled FS (on any platforms)? Or at least >emit a warning. If we can detect it at all (I guess that could be why). >While not as bad as FAT for reliability, still not very good... > >//Magnus > > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to [email protected] so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [email protected]