From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Mount options for Ext3? |
Date: | 2003-01-25 01:16:48 |
Message-ID: | 28176.1043457408@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> writes:
> I suspect the answer to that is that you can safely turn off fsync
> only if the operating system will guarantee that write transactions
> from a process are actually committed in the order they arrive from
> that process.
Yeah. We use fsync partly so that when we tell a client a transaction
is committed, it really is committed (ie, down to disk) --- but also
as a means of controlling write order. I strongly doubt that any modern
filesystem will promise to execute writes exactly in the order issued,
unless prodded by means such as fsync.
> Otherwise you'd have to worry about write transactions
> to the transaction log committing before the writes to the data files
> during a savepoint,
Actually, the other way around is the problem. The WAL algorithm works
so long as log writes hit disk before the data-file changes they
describe (that's why it's called write *ahead* log).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Durst | 2003-01-25 01:30:08 | Re: Function for adding Money type |
Previous Message | Kevin Brown | 2003-01-25 00:30:11 | Re: Mount options for Ext3? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-25 01:19:02 | Re: Having trouble with backups (was: Re: Crash Recovery) |
Previous Message | Noah Silverman | 2003-01-25 01:14:09 | Re: WEIRD CRASH?!?! |