From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | 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 18:19:40 |
Message-ID: | 4CF691BC.4050602@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I think the best answer is to get out of the business of using
> O_DIRECT by default, especially seeing that available evidence
> suggests it might not be a performance win anyway.
Well, we don't have any performance evidence ... there's an issue with
the fsync-test script which causes it not to use O_DIRECT.
However, we haven't seen any evidence for benefits on any production
filesystem, either. So given the lack of evidence of performance
benefit, combined with the definite evidence of related failures, I
agree that simply disabling O_DIRECT by default would be a good way to
solve this.
It might be nice to add new sync_method options, "osync_odirect" and
"odatasync_odirect" for DBAs who think they know enough to tune with
non-defaults.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2010-12-01 18:41:46 | Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-01 18:09:05 | Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4 |