Re: Win32 and fsync()

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.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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