Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO
Date
Msg-id 52A0BCBC.3000608@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 12/05/2013 07:40 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's a bad idea in the current state of affairs. MM files haven't
>> been designed for that usage, and getting stable performance out of
>> that will be way too difficult.
> 
> I'm talking about long-term goals here. Either of these two routes
> would require whole new kernel interfaces to work effectively. Without
> those new kernel interfaces our current approach is possibly the best
> we can get.

Well, in the long run we'll probably be using persistent RAM.  And the
geeks who manage that have already said that MMAP is a bad interface for
persistent RAM.  They haven't defined a good one, though.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO