| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4 |
| Date: | 2010-12-01 03:25:22 |
| Message-ID: | 4CF5C022.4050302@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/30/2010 10:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> Apparently, testing for O_DIRECT at compile time isn't adequate. Ideas?
> We should wait for the outcome of the discussion about whether to change
> the default wal_sync_method before worrying about this.
>
>
Tom,
we've just had a significant PGX customer encounter this with the latest
Postgres on Redhat's freshly released flagship product. Presumably the
default wal_sync_method will only change prospectively. But this will
feel to every user out there who encounters it like a bug in our code,
and it needs attention. It was darn difficult to diagnose, and many
people will just give up in disgust if they encounter it.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2010-12-01 03:30:46 | Re: SQL/MED - core functionality |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-12-01 03:13:11 | Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4 |