Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Date
Msg-id 200103160526.AAA13962@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
List pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > My question was what are we needing to test?  If we can do only single writes
> > to the log, don't we prefer O_* to fsync, and the O_D* options over
> > plain O_*?  Am I confused?
> 
> I don't think we have enough data to conclude that with any certainty.

I just figured we knew the answers to above issues, that that the only
issue was multiple writes vs. fsync().

It is hard for me to imagine O_* being slower than fsync(), or fdatasync
being slower than fsync.  Are we not able to assume that?

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC