| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nikhil Shetty <nikhil(dot)dba04(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Recommended value for pg_test_fsync |
| Date: | 2020-06-30 15:24:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20200630152408.GA28711@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 10:32:13AM +0530, Nikhil Shetty wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Based on pg_test_fsync results, should we choose open_datasync or fdatasync as
> wal_sync_method? Can we rely on pg_test_fsync for choosing the best
I would just pick the fastest method, but if the method is _too_ fast,
it might mean that it isn't actually writing to durable storage.
> wal_sync_method or is there any other way?
pg_test_fsync is the only way I know of, which is why I wrote it.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gunther Schadow | 2020-06-30 16:10:17 | Is there a known bug with SKIP LOCKED and "tuple to be locked was already moved to another partition due to concurrent update"? |
| Previous Message | Nikhil Shetty | 2020-06-30 05:02:13 | Re: Recommended value for pg_test_fsync |