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

Re: [HACKERS] win32 performance - fsync question

From: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
To: <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>,<pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] win32 performance - fsync question
Date: 2005-02-24 16:19:39
Message-ID: 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3412A7631@Herge.rcsinc.local (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32
> MS is big enough and bad enough to get all the info they need from the
> various drive makers to know how to handle write cache flushing. Even
the
> stuff that isn't documented.

Yup.  This includes all the raid controllers I've tested...  
 
> Also, I would like to see this test performed on NTFS and FAT32, and
see
> if you are more likely to lose data on FAT32.

FAT32 is not journaling...you could see corruption at the filesystem
level, not to mention the fact that windows would want to run chkdsk
every time the system reboots.

Merlin



pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2005-02-24 17:44:25
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question
Previous:From: pgsqlDate: 2005-02-24 15:58:37
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync

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