Re: performance regression with Linux 2.6.33 and glibc 2.12

From: Marc Cousin <cousinmarc(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: performance regression with Linux 2.6.33 and glibc 2.12
Date: 2010-06-04 15:29:04
Message-ID: 201006041729.04321.cousinmarc@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

The Friday 04 June 2010 15:59:05, Tom Lane wrote :
> Marc Cousin <cousinmarc(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I hope I'm not going to expose an already known problem, but I couldn't
> > find it mailing list archives (I only found
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql- hackers/2009-12/msg01543.php).
>
> You sure this isn't the well-known "ext4 actually implements fsync
> where ext3 didn't" issue?
>
> regards, tom lane

Everything is ext4. So I should have fsync working with write barriers on all
the tests.

I don't think this problem is of the same kind: I think it is really because
of O_DSYNC appearing on 2.6.33, and PostgreSQL using it by default now. If my
filesystem was lying to me about barriers, I should take no more performance
hit with open_datasync than with fdatasync, should I ?

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2010-06-04 15:30:10 Re: Weird XFS WAL problem
Previous Message Andres Freund 2010-06-04 15:25:05 Re: performance regression with Linux 2.6.33 and glibc 2.12