| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "E(dot)Rodichev" <er(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: win32 performance - fsync question |
| Date: | 2005-02-16 18:55:47 |
| Message-ID: | 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3412A7625@Herge.rcsinc.local |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> looking for the way how to increase performance at Windows XP box, I
found
> the parameters
>
> #fsync = true # turns forced synchronization on or
off
> #wal_sync_method = fsync # the default varies across platforms:
> # fsync, fdatasync, open_sync, or
> open_datasync
>
> I have no idea how it works with win32. May I try fsync = false, or it
is
> dangerous? Which of wal_sync_method may I try at WinXP?
wal_sync_method does nothing on XP. The fsync option will tremendously
increase performance on writes at the cost of possible data corruption
in the event of a expected server power down.
The main performance difference between win32 and various unix systems
is that fsync() takes much longer on win32 than linux.
Merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-02-16 20:21:10 | Re: Help me recovering data |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-16 18:54:28 | Re: Strange RETURN NEXT behaviour in Postgres 8.0 |