Re: IDE Drives and fsync

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IDE Drives and fsync
Date: 2003-10-13 21:44:22
Message-ID: 29666.1066081462@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> Tom, you had mentioned adding a delay of some kind to the fsync logic, and
> I'd be more than willing to try out any patch you'd like to toss out to me
> to see if we can get a semi-stable behaviour out of IDE drives with the
> -W1 and -f switches turned on.

I'd suggest experimenting with the delay in mdsync() in
src/backend/storage/smgr/md.c. A larger delay should theoretically make
things more reliable.

If you see signs of corruption of the WAL itself, another knob you could
fool with is the wal_sync_method setting in postgresql.conf. I have no
idea whether different sync methods would improve the odds of getting
the drive to write WAL sectors in the right order, but it'd be worth
experimenting with.

I dunno whether you have the ability to experiment with a dual-drive
machine, but it would certainly be worth revisiting all these tests
on a setup with WAL on a separate drive.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-10-13 22:25:04 Re: [HACKERS] Sun performance - Major discovery!
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-10-13 21:40:11 Re: http://www.pgsql.com/register/submit.php