Re: Filesystem Direct I/O and WAL sync option - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: Filesystem Direct I/O and WAL sync option
Date
Msg-id 87lkdx0y5d.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Filesystem Direct I/O and WAL sync option  (Dimitri <dimitrik.fr@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Filesystem Direct I/O and WAL sync option
List pgsql-performance
"Dimitri" <dimitrik.fr@gmail.com> writes:

> Yes, disk drives are also having cache disabled or having cache on
> controllers and battery protected (in case of more  high-level
> storage) - but is it enough to expect data consistency?... (I was
> surprised about checkpoint sync, but does it always calls write()
> anyway? because in this way it should work without fsync)...

Well if everything is mounted in sync mode then I suppose you have the same
guarantee as if fsync were called after every single write. If that's true
then surely that's at least as good. I'm curious how it performs though.

Actually it seems like in that configuration fsync should be basically
zero-cost. In other words, you should be able to leave fsync=on and get the
same performance (whatever that is) and not have to worry about any risks.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: Query is taking 5 HOURS to Complete on 8.1 version
Next
From: Axel Rau
Date:
Subject: Re: Delete Cascade FK speed issue