| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev(at)sectorbase(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WAL does not recover gracefully from out-of-disk-space |
| Date: | 2001-03-08 16:39:26 |
| Message-ID: | 25941.984069566@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev(at)sectorbase(dot)com> writes:
> I see that seek+write was changed to write-s in XLogFileInit
> (that was induced by subj, right?), but what about problem
> itself?
> BTW, were performance tests run after seek+write --> write-s
> change?
That change was for safety, not for performance. It might be a
performance win on systems that support fdatasync properly (because it
lets us use fdatasync), otherwise it's probably not a performance win.
But we need it regardless --- if you didn't want a fully-allocated WAL
file, why'd you bother with the original seek-and-write-1-byte code?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?= | 2001-03-08 16:43:16 | Re: How to shoot yourself in the foot: kill -9 postmaster |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-03-08 16:35:51 | Re: WAL does not recover gracefully from out-of-disk-space |