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

Re: posix_fadvise versus old kernels

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: posix_fadvise versus old kernels
Date: 2006-06-27 18:51:12
Message-ID: 26472.1151434272@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> While we could possibly come up with a suitable configure test to
>> determine whether posix_fadvise is actually safe to use on a given
>> system, I think we should seriously consider just reverting the patch.
>> As far as I saw, zero evidence was given that it actually does anything
>> measurable.  Without a benchmark to prove that it's worth spending more
>> time on, I'm disinclined to trouble over it.

> Agreed.  How about if we just #ifdef NOT_USED the code and mention the
> problem in a comment.

Works for me; I'll write something and commit it.  We can leave the
is-posix_fadvise-declared configure test in place, at least for now ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark WoodwardDate: 2006-06-27 19:02:13
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?
Previous:From: Mark WoodwardDate: 2006-06-27 18:49:58
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?

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