Hello Amit,
> Not that the GUC naming is the most pressing issue here, but do you think
> "*_flush_on_write" describes what the patch does?
It is currently "*_flush_to_disk". In Andres Freund version the name is
"sync_on_checkpoint_flush", but I did not found it very clear. Using
"*_flush_on_write" instead as your suggest, would be fine as well, it
emphasizes the "when/how" it occurs instead of the final "destination",
why not...
About words: checkpoint "write"s pages, but this really mean passing the
pages to the memory manager, which will think about it... "flush" seems to
suggest a more effective write, but really it may mean the same, the page
is just passed to the OS. So "write/flush" is really "to OS" and not "to
disk". I like the data to be on "disk" in the end, and as soon as
possible, hence the choice to emphasize that point.
Now I would really be okay with anything that people find simple to
understand, so any opinion is welcome!
--
Fabien.
