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: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Date: 2001-03-15 22:54:22
Message-ID: 15946.984696862@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:
> How many files need to be fsync'd?

Only one.

> If it's more than one, what might work is using mmap() to map the
> files in adjacent areas, then calling msync() on the entire range,
> this would allow you to batch fsync the data.

Interesting thought, but mmap to a prespecified address is most
definitely not portable, whether or not you want to assume that
plain mmap is ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message ryan 2001-03-15 22:59:41 PostgreSQL Search Engine - searchraw.php3 (0/1)
Previous Message Alfred Perlstein 2001-03-15 22:51:00 Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC