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

Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kurt Roeckx <Q(at)ping(dot)be>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,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 20:39:58
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
Tom, Bruce,

> My previous point about checking different fsync spacings corresponds to
> different assumptions about average transaction size.  I think a useful
> tool for determining wal_sync_method has got to be able to reflect that
> range of possibilities.

1) This is an OSS project.   Why not just recruit a bunch of people on 
PERFORMANCE and GENERAL to test the 4 different synch methods using real 
databases?   No test like reality, I say ....

2) Won't Jan's work on 7.5 memory and I/O management mean that we have to 
re-evaluate synching anyway?

-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-03-18 20:49:20
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-03-18 20:39:12
Subject: Re: string casting for index usage

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2004-03-18 20:43:47
Subject: Re: compile warning in CVS HEAD
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-03-18 20:34:21
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group