You answer the question.

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0718020880.htm

Could you just stop posting nonsense?
Thanks, I appreciate the effort.

Bye,
Flavio

"FC" <flavio (AT) tin (DOT) it> wrote
blaming Oracle for a serious failure), but 5 posts in two days is beyond the
level of troll....

"Keith" <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote

Who has suffered serious data loss? Orbitz hasn't lost a single bit of
comitted customer data. read the links you post.


--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
*****************************************
Please include version and platform
and SQL where applicable
It makes life easier and increases the
likelihood of a good answer
******************************************

Sent the last post in error, here is the corrected one:

The point is, there is potential of data loss whenever there is the
possibility of an outage. Because they avoided it this time, does not
mean the will next time. Data loss or not, there was financial loss as
stated in the article. In the end, it is the financial loss that is
important. Everything eventually comes down to a financial loss and how
to prevent it.


Keith wrote:

Hello?? RAC was identified as the problem. RAC was replaced. Site is up
and running. Which of those news links do not point to Oracle as the
problem?

rob wrote:

can have a meaningfull discussion.

'nuf said
Rob.

Keith wrote:

Keith,

The post IS on topic for cdo.MISC. Please avoid cross posting to the
other groups. Cross-posting is simply rude behaviour by all netiquette
standard.

This has been cross-replied to provide a consistent request all others
--- please respond to Keith's messages ONLY in cdo.misc

Thx
/Hans

Niall Litchfield wrote:

I killfiled Keith as he is obviously a troll that couldn't write a SQL
statement if you threatened him with bodily harm ... but it seems from the
responses he is still doing the one thing he is capable of doing ... wasting
bandwidth.

I would suggest that everyone do as I have done ... killfile him / ignore
him. He has nothing of value to contribute. Never has ... likely never will.

Now I've killed the thread too so I'll not be seeing any of this.
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Keith <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote in
news:vhgep3qcble8e9 (AT) news (DOT) supernews.com:

That article doesn't mention any data loss.

Here's one that does.

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...lah%40trade-in
dia.com

Subject: data loss due to improper handling of postmaster ....
This is the only article in this thread
View: Original Format
Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.admin
Date: 2002-05-07 23:17:53 PST

Hi folks,

this is a long email.
I too experienced a data loss of 11 hrs recently.
i have the most recent postgresql 7.2.1 on RedHat 6.2

but my case was bit different and i feel my wrong handling
of situation was also responsible for it.

I would be grateful if someone could tell me what should have
been done *instead* to prevent the data loss.

as far as i remember the following is the post mortem :

the load average of my database server had reached 5.15 and my website
had become slugglish so i decided to stop the postmaster and start
again, (i dont know it it was a right thing but was inituitive to me)

so i did

# su - postgres
# pg_ctl stop <-- did not work out
it said postmaster could not be stopped.

# pg_ctl stop -m immediate
it said postmaster is stopped ,
but it was wrong ps auxwww still showed some processes running.

# pg_clt -l /var/log/pgsql start
said started successfully (but in reality not )

at this point postmaster is neither dead nor running essentially my live
website was down, so under pressure i decided to reboot the system
and told my ISP to do so.

but even the reboot was not smooth , the unix admin of my isp says
some process does not let the system reboot (and it was postmaster).
so he has to put the machine in power cycle and the machine fscked
in startup.

as a result i too got similar messages as Bojan has given below .
and my website was not connecting to the database.
it used to say "database in recovery mode.... "

then i did "pg_ctl stop" then start but nothing worked out.

since it was my production database i had to restore the database
in minimum time so i used my old backup that was 11 hrs old and
hence a major data loss.

I strongly beleive Postgresql is the best open source database
around and is *safe* unless fiddled in a wrong manner.

But there are problems in using it.

due to The current Lack of inbuilt failover and replication solutions
in postgresql people like me would tend to become desperate because
one cannot keep webserver down for long as a result we take wrong steps.

For mere mortals like me there should be set of guidelines for safe
handling of the server. (DOS' and DON'TS type) to prevent
DATA LOSS.


Also i would like suggestions on how to live with postgresql
with its current limitations of replication ( or failover solutions) and
without data loss.

what i currently do is backup my database with pg_dump but there are
problems with it.

Because of large size of my database pg_dump takes
20-30 mins and the server load increases this means
i cannot do it quite frequently on my production server.
so in worst case i still loose of duration ranging from 1-24 hrs
depending on frequency of pg_dump.
And for many of us even 1Hour of data is *quite* a loss for us.

I would also want comments on usability of USOGRES / RSERV
replication systems with postgres 7.2.1

hoping to get some tips from the intellectuals out here

regds
mallah.


On Tuesday 07 May 2002 07:52 pm, Bojan Belovic wrote: