On Tue, 07 Nov 2017, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Raphael,
>
> * Raphael Hertzog (hertzog@debian.org) wrote:
> > Still I believe that this issue should be fixed in both sides. It's not
> > smart from PostgreSQL to call fsync() when it has not made any change.
>
> Why?
Because it's useless. Why call fsync() when you know that it doesn't do
anything?
And because I have just shown that doing this can have unexpected
side-effects in some specific conditions.
But this is really a matter of aesthetics and trade-offs. I don't know the
code. It might be difficult to track the fact that changes have been made.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html
Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs