3 ms·

One time, me, a noob, accidentally deleted files in the PG data directory. No noe! But PG had open handles to them so they aren't reclaimed by the FS and I was

One time, me, a noob, accidentally deleted files in the PG data directory. No noe! But PG had open handles to them so they aren't reclaimed by the FS and I was able to pg_dump. Not a production system but the loss would've been "big". Just saying, PG itself is very resilient.

lelanthran 4y ago
> One time, me, a noob, accidentally deleted files in the PG data directory. No noe! But PG had open handles to them so they aren't reclaimed by the FS and I was able to pg_dump. Not a production system but the loss would've been "big". Just saying, PG itself is very resilient. That isn't a PG thing; Linux[1] ext3/4 does not actually delete files (or directories) that are still in use. Only the name is removed. The file itself remains until the last open handle to it is closed. [1] Amongst other OSes
- gjvc 4y ago
  if you'd read the previous post carefully, you'd have seen they said that
  - factcheckdec 4y ago
    Did their clarification truly merit such a snarky response?
    - gjvc 4y ago
      it wasn't clarification; it was repetition
      - hombre_fatal 4y ago
        No, the comment did make it sound like it was PG’s resilience that saved the data. In fact that seems to be the whole point of the comment. So the snark does seem out of place and the clarification useful.
        gjvc 4y ago
        nice bit of white-knighting there
        lelanthran 4y ago
        > nice bit of white-knighting there Is it really constructive to throw insults[1]? I explained myself above, after all. [1] I had to look it up to see what it means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_knight https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_knight. Since we aren't in a business context, I can only assume that you think I am female :-)
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    > if you'd read the previous post carefully, you'd have seen they said that I did read it carefully (and quoted the whole thing for context), but that final line made it seem that it was PG that was responsible for that particular instance of resilience. Someone who isn't familiar with how ext3/4 handles deletes might, from the comment alone, assume that the same sort of thing would happen on other filesystems.

lelanthran 4y ago

> One time, me, a noob, accidentally deleted files in the PG data directory. No noe! But PG had open handles to them so they aren't reclaimed by the FS and I was able to pg_dump. Not a production system but the loss would've been "big". Just saying, PG itself is very resilient. That isn't a PG thing; Linux[1] ext3/4 does not actually delete files (or directories) that are still in use. Only the name is removed. The file itself remains until the last open handle to it is closed. [1] Amongst other OSes

gjvc 4y ago
if you'd read the previous post carefully, you'd have seen they said that
- factcheckdec 4y ago
  Did their clarification truly merit such a snarky response?
  - gjvc 4y ago
    it wasn't clarification; it was repetition
    - hombre_fatal 4y ago
      No, the comment did make it sound like it was PG’s resilience that saved the data. In fact that seems to be the whole point of the comment. So the snark does seem out of place and the clarification useful.
      - gjvc 4y ago
        nice bit of white-knighting there
        lelanthran 4y ago
        > nice bit of white-knighting there Is it really constructive to throw insults[1]? I explained myself above, after all. [1] I had to look it up to see what it means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_knight https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_knight. Since we aren't in a business context, I can only assume that you think I am female :-)
- lelanthran 4y ago
  > if you'd read the previous post carefully, you'd have seen they said that I did read it carefully (and quoted the whole thing for context), but that final line made it seem that it was PG that was responsible for that particular instance of resilience. Someone who isn't familiar with how ext3/4 handles deletes might, from the comment alone, assume that the same sort of thing would happen on other filesystems.