From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Win32 and fsync() |
Date: | 2003-02-03 22:58:34 |
Message-ID: | 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8259BC7@mail.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net]
> Sent: 03 February 2003 22:47
> To: PostgreSQL Hackers
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Win32 and fsync()
>
>
> I'm having difficulty digging up the reference, but I think I
> recall seeing something that said, roughly, on W32 there are
> 2 sets of buffers - those in the user level library and those
> in the kernel level driver, and FlushFileBuffers drains the
> first, while _commit drains both (it includes a call to
> FlushFileBuffers).
>
> I'm also fairly sure I saw something like
> #define fsync _commit
> in the Berkeley DB sources the other day, which might be a clue.
>
> I'll be happy to be corrected, though.
I too have yet to look at the Win32 patces, but if they have used
FlushFileBuffers, perhaps that would explain my powerfail test
results...
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-02-03 23:00:26 | Re: Win32 and fsync() |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-03 22:51:28 | Re: POSIX regex performance bug in 7.3 Vs. 7.2 |