Re: [HACKERS] win32 performance - fsync question

["Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>]

The default should clearly be the safest method.

Personally, I would disable anything but the safest method for all
database files that are not read-only.

IMO-YMMV.
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:53 AM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Magnus Hagander; Michael Paesold; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org;
pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org; Merlin Moncure
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] win32 performance - fsync
question

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > However, I do prefer this patch and let Win32 have the same write
cache
> > issues as Unix, for consistency.
> 
> I agree that the open flag is more nearly O_DSYNC than O_SYNC.
> 
> ISTM Windows' idea of fsync is quite different from Unix's and
therefore
> we should name the wal_sync_method that invokes it something different
> than fsync.  "write_through" or some such?  We already have precedent
> that not all wal_sync_method values are available on all platforms.
> 
> I'm not taking a position on which the default should be ...

Yes, I am thinking that too.  I hesistated because it adds yet another
sync method, and we have to document it works only on Win32, but I see
no better solution.

I am going to let the Win32 users mostly vote on what the default should
be.

-- 
  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

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster