Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes
Date: 2005-06-23 17:16:01
Message-ID: 20050623171601.GB89438@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 03:50:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The reason I question "automatic" is that you really want to test each
> drive being used, if the system has more than one; but Postgres has no
> idea what the actual hardware layout is, and so no good way to know what
> needs to be tested.

Would testing in the WAL directory be sufficient? Or at least better
than nothing? Of course we could test in the database directories as
well, but you never know if stuff's been symlinked elsewhere... err, we
can test for that, no?

In any case, it seems like it'd be good to try to test and throw a
warning if the drive appears to be caching or if we think the test might
not cover everything (ie symlinks in the data directory).
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-06-23 17:30:56 Re: plpgsql constraint checked data fails to restore
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-06-23 17:06:46 Re: The contrib hit list

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2005-06-23 17:40:18 Re: PL/pgSQL Debugger Support
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2005-06-23 17:06:42 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity