From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Recomended FS |
Date: | 2003-10-27 17:21:48 |
Message-ID: | 200310271721.h9RHLm825569@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Greg Stark wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
>
> > Sweet. It may be that the promise is turning off the cache, or that the
> > new generation of IDE drives is finally reporting fsync correctly. Was
> > there a performance difference in the set with write cache on or off?
>
> Check out this thread. It seems the ATA standard does not include any way to
> make fsync work properly without destroying performance. At least on linux
> even that much is impossible without disabling caching entirely as the
> operation required isn't exposed to user-space. There is some hope for the
> future though.
>
> http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0310.2/0163.html
I thought the operating system has to write the block and force it to
disk, and that happened the same with SCSI and IDE. I didn't assume the
drive would associate multiple blocks with the fsync.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-10-27 17:24:55 | Re: Temporary tables and miscellaneous schemas |
Previous Message | Jeff | 2003-10-27 17:20:18 | Re: Experience with PL/xx? |