Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Load distributed checkpoint

From: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Load distributed checkpoint
Date: 2006-12-20 12:14:50
Message-ID: 040c01c72430$72a69b60$19527c0a@OPERAO (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
> That implies that fsyncing a datafile blocks fsyncing the WAL. That
> seems terribly unlikely (although...). What OS/Kernel/Filesystem is
> this. I note a sync bug in linux for ext3 that may have relevence.

Oh, really?  What bug?  I've heard that ext3 reports wrong data to
iostat when it performs writes (the data is correct when performing
reads.)
My env is:

OS: RHEL 4.0 for AMD64/EM64T
kernel: 2.6.9-42.ELsmp
The file system is ext3.

Terribly unlikely?  But I've seen the disk utilization quite often.




In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2006-12-20 12:26:59
Subject: Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-12-20 12:06:54
Subject: Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2006-12-20 12:26:59
Subject: Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-12-20 12:06:54
Subject: Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group