> > For instance, if there are assumptions that all data blocks are
> > written before this fact is recorded in a log file, then
> > "write data blocks" "fsynch" "write log" "fsynch" doesn't break
> > that assumption,
> Are we really doing a sync after the pg_log write ? While the sync
> after datablock write seems necessary to guarantee consistency,
> the sync after log write is actually not necessary to guarantee consistency.
> Would it be a first step, to special case the writing to pg_log, as
> to not sync (extra switch to backend) ? This would avoid the syncs
> for read only transactions, since they don't cause data block writes.
You are right. We don't need a sync after the pg_log write.
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 1999-06-24 15:46:27|
|Subject: Re: [PORTS] Postgres on NT freezing|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 1999-06-24 15:34:53|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] money data type and conversions]|