| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Kurt Roeckx <Q(at)ping(dot)be>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking |
| Date: | 2004-03-18 21:04:45 |
| Message-ID: | 12315.1079643885@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Well, I wrote the program to allow testing. I don't see a complex test
> as being that much better than simple one. We don't need accurate
> numbers. We just need to know if fsync or O_SYNC is faster.
Faster than what? The thing everyone is trying to point out here is
that it depends on context, and we have little faith that this test
program creates a context similar to a live Postgres database.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kurt Roeckx | 2004-03-18 21:09:51 | Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-18 21:00:54 | Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kurt Roeckx | 2004-03-18 21:09:51 | Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-18 21:00:54 | Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking |