From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Volatile write caches on macOS and Windows, redux |
Date: | 2024-05-29 13:49:57 |
Message-ID: | c0e6421d-8317-4cf0-b94b-d832b64265a5@eisentraut.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25.05.24 04:01, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> Is this the only reason why you're suggesting adding fsync=full,
> instead of simply always setting F_FULLFSYNC when fsync=true on MacOS.
> If so, I'm not sure we really gain anything by this tri-state. I think
> people either care about data loss on power loss, or they don't. I
> doubt many people want his third intermediate option, which afaict
> basically means lose data on powerloss less often than fsync=false but
> still lose data most of the time.
I agree, two states should be enough. It could basically just be
pg_fsync(int fd)
{
#if macos
fcntl(fd, F_FULLFSYNC);
#else
fsync(fd);
#endif
}