Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint

From: Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint
Date: 2004-02-08 21:54:51
Message-ID: 20040208215450.GI2608@filer
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Kevin Brown wrote:
>
> > I have no idea whether or not this approach would work in Windows.
>
> The win32 API has ReadFileScatter/WriteFileScatter, which was developed
> to handle these types of problems. These two functions were added for
> the sole purpose of making SQL server run faster. They are always
> asynchronous and are very efficient. Perhaps the win32 port could just
> deal with the synchronization with an eye for future optimizations down
> the line?

The problem with the approach I described on win32 is that fast fork()s
are required for it to not significantly impact the running backends.
That is, fork() has to return quickly when called. I don't know whether
the implementation of fork() under win32 would be fast enough for
this purpose. It might be -- I don't have any experience with fork()
on win32 platforms so I can't say.

--
Kevin Brown kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alex J. Avriette 2004-02-08 22:41:37 Re: RFC: Very large scale postgres support
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-02-08 20:14:11 Re: [HACKERS] dollar quoting