Re: win32 performance - fsync question

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: win32 performance - fsync question
Date: 2005-02-20 18:31:11
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE47690F@algol.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>> Portability, or rather the complete lack of it. Stuff that
>isn't in the
>> Single Unix Spec is a hard sell.
>
>O_DIRECT is reasonably common among modern Unixen (it is supported by
>Linux, FreeBSD, and probably a couple of the commercial variants like
>AIX or IRIX); it should also be reasonably easy to check for
>support at
>configure time. It's on my TODO list to take a gander at
>adding support
>for O_DIRECT for WAL, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Let me know when you do, and if you need some pointers on the win32
parts of it :-) I'll happily leave the main changes alone.

//Magnus

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-02-20 19:01:20 Re: SMP buffer management test question
Previous Message Greg Stark 2005-02-20 17:42:01 Re: Fwd: Apple Darwin disabled fsync?