Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Date: 2001-03-15 17:48:14
Message-ID: 14372.984678494@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net> writes:
> * Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> [010315 09:35] wrote:
>> BTW, are there any platforms where O_DSYNC exists but has a different
>> spelling?

> Yes, FreeBSD only has: O_FSYNC
> it doesn't have O_SYNC nor O_DSYNC.

Okay ... we can fall back to O_FSYNC if we don't see either of the
others. No problem. Any other weird cases out there? I think Andreas
might've muttered something about AIX but I'm not sure now.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2001-03-15 17:53:37 Re: rtrim giving weird result
Previous Message Alfred Perlstein 2001-03-15 17:44:15 Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC