Re: WAL and O_DIRECT
От | Ravi Krishna |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WAL and O_DIRECT |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14d530df35f-2108-30ce7@webstg-m03.mail.aol.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WAL and O_DIRECT (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: WAL and O_DIRECT
Re: WAL and O_DIRECT |
Список | pgsql-admin |
Aha that pretty much explains it. Yes we are using streaming replication.
However our DB2 folks are raising a concern that PG WAL writes may not be crash safe, unless we are using write back technology in SAN or SSD , which we are using.
However our DB2 folks are raising a concern that PG WAL writes may not be crash safe, unless we are using write back technology in SAN or SSD , which we are using.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Ravi Krishna <s.ravikrishna@aim.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thu, May 14, 2015 11:11 am
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] WAL and O_DIRECT
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Ravi Krishna <s.ravikrishna@aim.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thu, May 14, 2015 11:11 am
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] WAL and O_DIRECT
Ravi Krishna <s.ravikrishna@aim.com> writes: > Why is O_DIRECT not used, despite the documentation mentioning otherwise? You've not shown us all your settings, but this comment in xlog.c might explain it: * Optimize writes by bypassing kernel cache with O_DIRECT when using * O_SYNC/O_FSYNC and O_DSYNC. But only if archiving and streaming are * disabled, otherwise the archive command or walsender process will read * the WAL soon after writing it, which is guaranteed to cause a physical * read if we bypassed the kernel cache. We also skip the * posix_fadvise(POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) call in XLogFileClose() for the same * reason. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: