| From: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Win32 and fsync() |
| Date: | 2003-02-04 13:05:40 |
| Message-ID: | 004e01c2cc4e$1ef25ab0$6401a8c0@DUNSLANE |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
[snip]
> > Where is the "other" flush besides FlushFileBuffers()?
>
> The only real code there is, it seems, an exclusive look on the file
> descriptor. (Provided of course that that is what _lock_fh(filedes) does).
>
yes, it looks that way.
I wonder what whould happen to reliability and performance if the files were
opened using Windows' write through cache flag (FILE_FLAG_WRITE_THROUGH).
Also, this article might be relevant:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;332023
although I see the Windows tests were done on W2000/SP3, so maybe not.
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-02-04 13:18:58 | Re: Win32 and fsync() |
| Previous Message | Nigel J. Andrews | 2003-02-04 12:10:08 | Re: Interactive Documentation - how do you want it towork? |