Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint
Date: 2004-02-10 01:27:05
Message-ID: 21793.1076376425@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> Doing this is not just what you call it. In a system with let's say 500
> active backends on a database with let's say 1000 things that are
> represented as a file, you'll need half a million virtual file descriptors.

[shrug] We've been dealing with virtual file descriptors for years.
I've seen no indication that they create any performance bottlenecks.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2004-02-10 02:19:30 SSL mode annoyance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-02-10 01:24:56 Re: CVS HEAD compile failure on Freebsd 4.9

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gerardo Lucero Baylon 2004-02-11 23:11:18 Problem with win 32 libpq calls
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2004-02-09 21:43:28 Re: [PATCHES] win32 signals, part 5