Re: Win32 Powerfail testing

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Win32 Powerfail testing
Date: 2003-03-08 00:05:30
Message-ID: 20030308.090530.104028095.t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> But even then, we don't actually have to track the *names* of the
> files that have changed, just their RelFileNodes, since there's a
> mapping function from the RelFileNode to the filename.

Right. I have noticed that too and have made changes to my
implementaion.

BTW, you need to track the block number as well. Files > 1GB may be
splitted into separate files (segments).

> > Of course, if there are lots of files, sync() may be faster than
> > opening/fsync/closing all those files.
>
> This is true, and is something I hadn't actually thought of. So it
> sounds like some testing would be in order.

I regard the difference between sync() and fsync() does not affect too
much to the whole performance. Checkpoint process is performed as a
separate process and the fsync() part of checkpoint does nothing with
WAL, that means other backend processes, busy with WAL IO will
not be bothered.
--
Tatsuo Ishii

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Clift 2003-03-08 00:16:55 Re: Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?
Previous Message Brian Hirt 2003-03-07 23:32:57 Re: division by zero