Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question
Date
Msg-id 24903.1109258476@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question  ("Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>)
Responses Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync  (pgsql@mohawksoft.com)
List pgsql-hackers
"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> My results are:
> Fisrt, baseline:
> * Linux, with fsync (default), write-cache disabled: no data corruption
> * Linux, with fsync (default), write-cache enabled: usually no data
> corruption, but two runs which had

That makes sense.

> * Win32, with fsync, write-cache disabled: no data corruption
> * Win32, with fsync, write-cache enabled: no data corruption
> * Win32, with osync, write cache disabled: no data corruption
> * Win32, with osync, write cache enabled: no data corruption. Once I
> got:
> 2005-02-24 12:19:54 LOG:  could not open file "C:/Program
> Files/PostgreSQL/8.0/data/pg_xlog/000000010000000000000010" (log file 0,
> segment 16): No such file or directory
>   but the data in the database was consistent.

It disturbs me that you couldn't produce data corruption in the cases
where it theoretically should occur.  Seems like this is an indication
that your test was insufficiently severe, or that there is something
going on we don't understand.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question
Next
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question