| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anthony Iliopoulos <ailiop(at)altatus(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
| Date: | 2018-04-04 13:53:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20180404135301.GE25202@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:40:16AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> The trouble with direct I/O is that it pushes a _lot_ of work back on
> PostgreSQL regarding knowledge of the storage subsystem, I/O scheduling, etc.
> It's absurd to have the kernel do this, unless you want it reliable, in which
> case you bypass it and drive the hardware directly.
>
> We'd need pools of writer threads to deal with all the blocking I/O. It'd be
> such a nightmare. Hey, why bother having a kernel at all, except for drivers?
I believe this is how Oracle views the kernel, so there is precedent for
this approach, though I am not advocating it.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2018-04-04 14:00:15 | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-04-04 13:49:38 | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |