| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: race condition in sync rep |
| Date: | 2011-03-26 18:04:48 |
| Message-ID: | 4636.1301162688@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Well, in that case, it should be on the open-items list. If the system
>> is still behaving that way, it's a bug.
> Is it? Sync rep requires fsync on the standby. If you then explicitly
> turn off fsync on the standby then it has a performance impact, as
> documented.
No, that's utter nonsense. If the system is behaving that way, then
it's a bug. If you don't think it's a bug, then you misunderstand what
the fsync GUC is supposed to do. What fsync=off is supposed to do is
cause every attempted fsync to succeed instantly. It is *not possible*
for that to result in a performance slowdown compared to fsyncs that
take nonzero time. Unless someone's broken it. The documented behavior
is broken. Period.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-26 18:11:37 | Re: 9.1 Beta |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-26 17:51:21 | Re: race condition in sync rep |