| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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 |