| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
| Date: | 2005-05-30 06:52:09 |
| Message-ID: | 6455.1117435929@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> I wonder if we're benchmarking the right thing, though: is
> opening a file with O_DIRECT sufficient to ensure that a write(2) does
> not return until the data has hit disk?
Some googling suggests so, eg
http://www.die.net/doc/linux/man/man2/open.2.html
There are several useful tidbits about O_DIRECT on that page,
including this quote:
> "The thing that has always disturbed me about O_DIRECT is that the whole
> interface is just stupid, and was probably designed by a deranged monkey
> on some serious mind-controlling substances." -- Linus
Somehow I find that less than confidence-building...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-05-30 07:04:41 | Re: O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-05-30 06:29:40 | Re: O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-05-30 07:04:41 | Re: O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-05-30 06:29:40 | Re: O_DIRECT for WAL writes |