Re: Weird XFS WAL problem

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: "Greg Smith" <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Craig James" <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com>, "Matthew Wakeling" <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Weird XFS WAL problem
Date: 2010-06-04 15:23:52
Message-ID: 4C08D4380200002500031F5D@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:

>> The controller waits for the drive to tell it that it has made it
>> to the platter before it discards it. What made you think
>> otherwise?
>
> Because a write-back drive cache says it is on the drive before it
> hits the platters, which I think is the default for SATA drive.
> Is that inaccurate?

Any decent RAID controller will ensure that the drives themselves
aren't using write-back caching. When we've mentioned write-back
versus write-through on this thread we've been talking about the
behavior of the *controller*. We have our controllers configured to
use write-back through the BBU cache as long as the battery is good,
but to automatically switch to write-through if the battery goes
bad.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2010-06-04 15:25:05 Re: performance regression with Linux 2.6.33 and glibc 2.12
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2010-06-04 15:18:10 Re: Weird XFS WAL problem