| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4 |
| Date: | 2010-12-01 19:03:38 |
| Message-ID: | 4CF69C0A.8020701@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/01/2010 01:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 December 2010 19:09:05 Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>>> It's a bug and it's our bug.
>> No, it's a filesystem bug that this particular filesystem doesn't
>> support a perfectly reasonable combination of options, and doesn't
>> even fail gracefully as it could easily do. But assigning blame
>> doesn't help much.
> I wouldnt call it a reasonable combination - promising fs-level data-
> journaling (data=journal) and O_DIRECT are not really compatible with each
> other...
>
>
OK, but how is an application supposed to know that data journaling is
set. Postgres doesn't even look at the FS type, let alone the mount
options. From the app's POV it's perfectly reasonable. If the OS is
going to provide the API, it should expect people to use it.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-12-01 19:19:03 | Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack) |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-12-01 19:00:25 | Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4 |