| From: | Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Curtis Faith" <curtis(at)galtair(dot)com>, "Pgsql-Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching |
| Date: | 2002-10-05 15:28:07 |
| Message-ID: | m38z1coqgo.fsf@varsoon.wireboard.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> "Curtis Faith" <curtis(at)galtair(dot)com> writes:
> > The log file would be opened O_DSYNC, O_APPEND every time.
>
> Keep in mind that we support platforms without O_DSYNC. I am not
> sure whether there are any that don't have O_SYNC either, but I am
> fairly sure that we measured O_SYNC to be slower than fsync()s on
> some platforms.
And don't we preallocate WAL files anyway? So O_APPEND would be
irrelevant?
-Doug
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-05 15:32:42 | Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large Performance |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-05 15:15:47 | Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching |