| From: | "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Load distributed checkpoint |
| Date: | 2006-12-20 12:14:50 |
| Message-ID: | 040c01c72430$72a69b60$19527c0a@OPERAO |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> That implies that fsyncing a datafile blocks fsyncing the WAL. That
> seems terribly unlikely (although...). What OS/Kernel/Filesystem is
> this. I note a sync bug in linux for ext3 that may have relevence.
Oh, really? What bug? I've heard that ext3 reports wrong data to
iostat when it performs writes (the data is correct when performing
reads.)
My env is:
OS: RHEL 4.0 for AMD64/EM64T
kernel: 2.6.9-42.ELsmp
The file system is ext3.
Terribly unlikely? But I've seen the disk utilization quite often.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-12-20 12:26:59 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-12-20 12:06:54 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-12-20 12:26:59 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-12-20 12:06:54 | Re: column ordering, was Re: [PATCHES] Enums patch v2 |