Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Date: 2001-03-15 20:20:09
Message-ID: 200103152020.PAA15544@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Based on the tests we did last week, it seems clear than on many
> platforms it's a win to sync the WAL log by writing it with open()
> option O_SYNC (or O_DSYNC where available) rather than issuing explicit
> fsync() (resp. fdatasync()) calls. In theory fsync ought to be faster,
> but it seems that too many kernels have inefficient implementations of
> fsync.

Can someone explain why configure/platform-specific flags are allowed to
be added at this stage in the release, but my pgmonitor patch was
rejected?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(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 Bruce Momjian 2001-03-15 20:26:59 Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Previous Message Alfred Perlstein 2001-03-15 19:51:21 Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC