Re: [HACKERS] Postgres Speed or lack thereof

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane)
Cc: jholland(at)isr(dot)umd(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgres Speed or lack thereof
Date: 1999-01-20 06:22:55
Message-ID: 199901200622.BAA24377@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> John Holland <jholland(at)isr(dot)umd(dot)edu> writes:
> > can you explain the -F flag? when is it passed to what?
>
> -F is a command-line flag passed to the backend at backend startup.
> Since backends are normally started by the postmaster, what you
> really do in practice is to start the postmaster with "-o -F".
> For example my postmaster start script looks like
>
> nohup postmaster -i -o "-F" >server.log 2>&1 </dev/null &
>
> What the -F switch actually does is to disable calls to fsync(2),
> thereby allowing modified file blocks to hang around in kernel
> memory for a little while (up to 30 seconds in most Unixes)
> rather than being force-written to disk as soon as each transaction
> commits. If the same block of the database file gets modified
> again within that time window (very likely under a repeated-update
> load), you just saved a disk write. On the other hand, if your OS
> crashes or your power goes out in those 30 sec, you just lost a
> database update that you thought you had committed.
>
> I'm not sure I believe the argument that omitting -F buys very much
> safety, even if you do not trust your power company. Murphy's law
> says that a power flicker will happen in the middle of committing
> a transaction, not during the 30-second-max window between when you
> could've had the data flushed to disk if only you'd used fsync()
> and when the swapper process will fsync it on its own. And in that
> case you have a corrupted database anyway. So my theory is you use
> a reliable OS, and get yourself a UPS if your power company isn't
> reliable (lord knows mine ain't), and back up your database as often
> as you can. -F buys enough speed that it's worth the small extra risk.
>
> There are competent experts with conflicting opinions, however ;-)
>
> See doc/README.fsync for more about -F and the implications of
> using it.

Well said, and I think we have to address this shortcoming. Vadim has
been reluctant to turn off fsync by default. I have been trying to come
up with some soft-fsync on my own but haven't hit on anything he agrees
with yet.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Meskes 1999-01-20 09:01:02 Re: [HACKERS] latest parser changes
Previous Message Tom Lane 1999-01-20 05:57:20 Re: [HACKERS] Postgres Speed or lack thereof