Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes
Date: 2010-12-07 23:52:45
Message-ID: 4CFEC8CD.9000606@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> I am unclear as to the reason why there is a test for
> HAVE_FSYNC_WRITETHROUGH_ONLY in pg_fsync(). Perhaps that is also
> leftover from a previous vision of how this all works? Or does an
> fsync() call actually fail on Windows?

No, fsync responds fine. It just don't actually sync to disk.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christophe Pettus 2010-12-07 23:53:31 Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-12-07 23:49:55 Re: Final(?) proposal for wal_sync_method changes