Re: fdatasync performance problem with large number of DB files
From:
Paul Guo <guopa(at)vmware(dot)com>
To:
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc:
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Brown <michael(dot)brown(at)discourse(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject:
Re: fdatasync performance problem with large number of DB files
About the syncfs patch, my first impression on the guc name sync_after_crash is that it is a boolean type. Not sure about other people's feeling. Do you guys think It is better to rename it to a clearer name like sync_method_after_crash or others?