| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Michael Tharp" <gxti(at)partiallystapled(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Craig Ringer" <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Subject: | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Date: | 2010-05-10 19:57:42 |
| Message-ID: | 16370.1273521462@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Perhaps Josh's language for fsync could be modified to work here
> (we're now talking about full_page_writes, for anyone who's lost
> track):
> | it is only advisable to turn off fsync if you can easily recreate
> | your entire database from external data.
> That covers bulk loads to an empty or just-backed-up database and
> entirely redundant databases. Saying it should never be turned off
> would tend to make one wonder why we have the setting at all.
+1. Perhaps for both of them, we should specify that the intended
use-case is for improving performance during initial database load
and similar cases.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cédric Villemain | 2010-05-10 20:22:05 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-05-10 19:00:37 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cédric Villemain | 2010-05-10 20:22:05 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-05-10 19:00:37 | Re: no universally correct setting for fsync |