Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > However, I do prefer this patch and let Win32 have the same write cache
> > issues as Unix, for consistency.
>
> I agree that the open flag is more nearly O_DSYNC than O_SYNC.
>
> ISTM Windows' idea of fsync is quite different from Unix's and therefore
> we should name the wal_sync_method that invokes it something different
> than fsync. "write_through" or some such? We already have precedent
> that not all wal_sync_method values are available on all platforms.
>
> I'm not taking a position on which the default should be ...
Yes, I am thinking that too. I hesistated because it adds yet another
sync method, and we have to document it works only on Win32, but I see
no better solution.
I am going to let the Win32 users mostly vote on what the default should
be.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
