| From: | "Dominic J(dot) Eidson" <sauron(at)the-infinite(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, vadim4o(at)email(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: WAL and commit_delay |
| Date: | 2001-02-17 23:05:31 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0102171703510.19320-100000@morannon.the-infinite.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Another thing I am wondering about is why we're not using fdatasync(),
> where available, instead of fsync(). The whole point of preallocating
> the WAL files is to make fdatasync safe, no?
Linux/x86 fdatasync(2) manpage:
BUGS
Currently (Linux 2.0.23) fdatasync is equivalent to fsync.
--
Dominic J. Eidson
"Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.the-infinite.org/ http://www.the-infinite.org/~dominic/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew Kirkwood | 2001-02-17 23:18:37 | Linux 2.2 vs 2.4 |
| Previous Message | Nathan Myers | 2001-02-17 23:04:13 | Re: WAL and commit_delay |