| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Win32 port list <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |
| Date: | 2003-11-16 20:17:08 |
| Message-ID: | 9687.1069013828@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-patches |
Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> Removing sync() entirely requires very accurate fsync()'ing in the
> background writer, the checkpointer and the backends. Basically none of
> them can mark a block "clean" if he fails to fsync() the relation later!
> This will be a mess to code.
Not really. The O_SYNC solution for example would be trivial to code.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-16 20:43:27 | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-16 20:00:24 | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-16 20:43:27 | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-16 20:00:24 | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-16 20:43:27 | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-16 20:00:24 | Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code |