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

Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4
Date: 2010-12-01 03:25:22
Message-ID: 4CF5C022.4050302@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/30/2010 10:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>  writes:
>> Apparently, testing for O_DIRECT at compile time isn't adequate.  Ideas?
> We should wait for the outcome of the discussion about whether to change
> the default wal_sync_method before worrying about this.
>
> 			

Tom,

we've just had a significant PGX customer encounter this with the latest 
Postgres on Redhat's freshly released flagship product. Presumably the 
default wal_sync_method will only change prospectively. But this will 
feel to every user out there who encounters it like a bug in our code, 
and it needs attention. It was darn difficult to diagnose, and many 
people will just give up in disgust if they encounter it.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hitoshi HaradaDate: 2010-12-01 03:30:46
Subject: Re: SQL/MED - core functionality
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-12-01 03:13:11
Subject: Re: We really ought to do something about O_DIRECT and data=journalled on ext4

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