Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistent memory - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistent memory
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZYfM=YgyTaZ21DWxGqdqRD_z8ZZ8mJteb46w1+zFLLaA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistentmemory  ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:54 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Yes, that's pg_test_fsync output.  Isn't pg_test_fsync the tool to determine the value for wal_sync_method?  Is this
manualmisleading?
 

Hmm.  I hadn't thought about it as misleading, but now that you
mention it, I'd say that it probably is.  I suspect that there should
be a disclaimer saying that the fastest WAL sync method in terms of
ops/second is not necessarily the one that will deliver the best
database performance, and mention the issues around open_sync and
open_datasync specifically.  But let's see what your testing shows;
I'm talking based on now-fairly-old experience with this and a passing
familiarity with the relevant source code.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: AS OF queries
Next
From: a.parfenov@postgrespro.ru
Date:
Subject: Configuring messages language on Windows