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

Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: markw(at)osdl(dot)org
Cc: manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com,Q(at)ping(dot)be, markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking
Date: 2004-03-25 18:52:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
markw(at)osdl(dot)org wrote:
> > I've made a test run that compares fsync and fdatasync: The performance 
> > was identical:
> > - with fdatasync:
> > 
> >
> > 
> > - with fsync:
> >
> > 
> > I don't understand why. Mark - is there a battery backed write cache in 
> > the raid controller, or something similar that might skew the results? 
> > The test generates quite a lot of wal traffic - around 1.5 MB/sec. 
> > Perhaps the writes are so large that the added overhead of syncing the 
> > inode is not noticable?
> > Is the pg_xlog directory on a seperate drive?
> > 
> > Btw, it's possible to request such tests through the web-interface, see
> >
> We have 2 Adaptec 2200s controllers, without the battery backed add-on,
> connected to four 10-disk arrays in those systems.  I can't think of
> anything off hand that would skew the results.
> The pg_xlog directory is not on a separate drive.  I haven't found the
> best way to lay out of the drives on those systems yet, so I just have
> everything on a 28 drive lvm2 volume.

We don't actually extend the WAL file during writes (preallocated), and
the access/modification timestamp is only in seconds, so I wonder of the
OS only updates the inode once a second.  What else would change in the
inode more frequently than once a second?

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-03-25 19:10:55
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-03-25 18:20:32
Subject: Re: column size too large, is this a bug?

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-03-25 19:10:55
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fsync method checking
Previous:From: Magnus Naeslund(t)Date: 2004-03-25 17:22:45
Subject: Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)

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