Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

* Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> [010318 14:55]:
> Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net> writes:
> >> Just by making a thread call libc changes personality to use thread
> >> safe routines (I.E. add mutex locking). Use one thread feature, get
> >> the whole set...which may not be that bad.
>
> > Actually it can be pretty bad. Locked bus cycles needed for mutex
> > operations are very, very expensive, not something you want to do
> > unless you really really need to do it.
>
> It'd be interesting to try to get some numbers about the actual cost
> of using a thread-aware libc, on platforms where there's a difference.
> Shouldn't be that hard to build a postgres executable with the proper
> library and run some benchmarks ... anyone care to try?
I can get the code compiled, but don't have the skills to generate
a test case worthy of anything....

LER

>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749