Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes
Date
Msg-id 1358.1291766324@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> I am unclear as to the reason why there is a test for
>> HAVE_FSYNC_WRITETHROUGH_ONLY in pg_fsync().  Perhaps that is also
>> leftover from a previous vision of how this all works?  Or does an
>> fsync() call actually fail on Windows?

> No, fsync responds fine.  It just don't actually sync to disk.

Right, which is also an accurate description of its behavior on OS X,
as well as Linux (if you didn't change hdparm settings).  So the real
question here is what's the point of treating Windows differently.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Christophe Pettus
Date:
Subject: Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes